Saba Haddad, the representative of the Baha’i International Community (BIC) to the United Nations in Geneva, called for Egypt to adopt internal administrative regulations to facilitate procedures for Baha’i citizens, ensuring the preservation of human dignity and the full enjoyment of civil rights for all. Her call comes in light of the Court of Cassation’s annulment of two previous rulings that had recognized the marriage of a Baha’i couple.
The case originated in September 1981, when the couple signed a private marriage contract. Decades later, the wife filed a lawsuit to officially document the union. In August 2020, a Court of First Instance ruled in her favor, a decision later upheld by the Court of Appeal in November 2023. However, the ministers of justice and interior challenged these rulings, bringing the matter before the Court of Cassation.
In its final ruling on Challenge No. 39 of Judicial Year 94, the Court of Cassation (Personal Status Circuit) overturned the previous judgments and dismissed the original lawsuit. The court grounded its decision in the premise that the Baha’i faith “falls outside the three divinely revealed religions recognized by the state (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism).”
The court’s reasoning emphasized that practicing the Baha’i faith constitutes “an infringement on the established systems of the state and public order.” While the court acknowledged the “freedom of belief” guaranteed by the Egyptian Constitution, it distinguished this from the “legal effects” arising from such beliefs. The ruling stated that individuals may hold any belief “on the condition that it does not involve an infringement on the state’s public order and stability.”
The court explicitly stated that “it is not permissible to record the Baha’i religion in civil status documents, nor in any other official documents issued by any state body that includes a statement of religion.”
The court concluded that the request to document the marriage according to the tenets of this faith “violated the established public order of the state,” which takes precedence over all other legislation. “Respect for the state’s constitutional system is a duty, and what is built on a violation of the constitution and public order has no existence and produces no effect,” the court stated, ordering the couple to pay all legal expenses.
Speaking to Al Manassa, Haddad expressed surprise at the ruling, noting a contradiction in the state’s position. She revealed that Ministry of Justice officials had previously advised Egyptian Baha’is to seek judicial rulings to validate their marriage contracts as the only way to resolve their legal limbo, yet the same ministry ultimately appealed the favorable rulings to the Court of Cassation.
Haddad emphasized that Baha’is are seeking their legitimate constitutional rights as full citizens, not exceptional treatment. She stressed that documenting Baha’i marriages is a “legal and humanitarian necessity” essential for family stability and the protection of children’s rights. Failing to document such unions, she warned, leads to “grave social and legal consequences, primarily the fragmentation of families and the undermining of social security.”
In light of the ruling, Haddad urged relevant Egyptian authorities to establish administrative regulations covering marriage and other civil transactions to ensure human dignity.
In 1925, Egypt became the first country in the world to legally recognize the Baha’i faith. Baha’is codified and published personal status laws governing marriage, divorce, inheritance and burial, and submitted these provisions to Egypt’s Council of Ministers. The Baha’i Assembly was officially recognized and registered in government records in 1934, according to the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms.
However, the contemporary environment has become increasingly restrictive. In April 2025, seven UN special rapporteurs wrote to the Egyptian government regarding concerns over “the alleged patterns of continuous discrimination against Baha’is, living in or visiting Egypt,” and the alleged arbitrary detention of a senior Baha’i official.
In reply, the Egyptian government stated that according to the constitution, “freedom of belief is absolute,” and it remained “fully committed to its duties towards its citizens in accordance with the Constitution and national legislation, as well as all human rights conventions to which it has acceded.”
In July, the BIC criticized the Egyptian government for its “dismissive response” to UN concerns regarding “promoting freedom of religion and belief,” stating that the “lived experience of the Baha’i community in Egypt exposes how hollow those claims are and calls into question Egypt’s assurances.”
Nine Egyptian human rights organizations also criticized the government’s response in September, describing the government’s response as “perfunctory,” lacking any guarantees or commitments to end violations.
