Historic Recommendation by the State Commissioners Authority on a Prisoner’s Wife’s Right to IVF

Report Cites UN “Nelson Mandela Rules,” Dixon v. UK, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

In a landmark and unprecedented report, the State Commissioners Authority at the Administrative Court recommended that a woman be granted the right to obtain samples and medical tests from her husband, who is serving a 15-year sentence at the Minya Correctional and Rehabilitation Center, in order to complete an in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedure at her own expense.

In its report on Case No. 41283 of Judicial Year 79, issued in April 2025, the Authority cited the Egyptian Constitution, which affirms that the family is the foundation of society and that the State is responsible for preserving its cohesion, stability, and values. The Constitution further states that no act shall be deemed a crime, nor shall a penalty be imposed, except by virtue of a law, and that no punishment shall be enforced except by a judicial ruling and only for acts committed after the law’s enactment.

The report also referenced rulings by the Supreme Administrative Court and the Supreme Constitutional Court, emphasizing that personal freedom is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution and is considered a natural right. This includes the right to marry and to form a family, which entails the obligation to treat incarcerated or detained individuals in a manner that preserves their human dignity.

The report cited the landmark case of Dickson v. The United Kingdom, decided by the European Court of Human Rights, concerning prisoners’ rights to family life. The Court held that imprisonment does not automatically strip individuals of their fundamental rights, and that facilitating access to IVF services does not pose a significant security risk or administrative or financial burden on the State.

In that case, Kirk Dickson—a prisoner serving a life sentence for murder—together with his wife, Lorraine Dickson, requested permission from UK authorities to access IVF services. Their request was denied, prompting them to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights. The Grand Chamber ultimately ruled that the UK’s refusal constituted a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Authority also relied on the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (known as the “Nelson Mandela Rules”), formally adopted by the UN General Assembly, which affirm the State’s responsibility to provide healthcare to prisoners at the same level available to the general public, including the right to receive necessary medical services free of charge and without discrimination based on legal status.

The report further referenced Presidential Decree No. 536 of 1981, approving the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966). Article 6 of the Covenant provides that every human being has the inherent right to life, which shall be protected by law, and no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of their life.

Article 9 guarantees the right to liberty and security of person, stating that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention, and that deprivation of liberty must be lawful and in accordance with established procedures. Article 10 mandates that all persons deprived of liberty be treated with humanity and respect for their inherent dignity.

The Authority also cited Article 23 of the Covenant, which recognizes the family as the natural and fundamental unit of society, entitled to protection by society and the State, and affirms the right of men and women of marriageable age to marry and to found a family.

Additionally, the Authority referenced Law No. 396 of 1956 regulating correctional and rehabilitation centers, as amended by Law No. 14 of 2022, affirming prisoners’ rights to humane treatment, visitation, healthcare, and necessary medical examinations and diagnostics.

The report emphasized that the Law on the Regulation of Prisons explicitly provides for the right to healthcare and mandates that the administrative authority responsible for a prisoner must facilitate his transfer to external hospitals when needed. Therefore, allowing a prisoner’s wife to obtain a medical sample from her husband for IVF purposes aligns with the objectives of the Constitution and relevant laws.

The Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights welcomed this historic report and expressed hope that the court will adopt its recommendations, given the extensive legal foundations and reasoning presented.

The Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights and the office of attorney Ihab El-Garhy had filed a lawsuit before the Administrative Court in Cairo against the Minister of Interior, the Assistant Minister for Human Rights Affairs, and the Head of the Community Protection Sector in Minya Governorate, in their official capacities, on behalf of a female petitioner. The lawsuit sought to annul the administrative authority’s implicit decision to deny her request to obtain samples and medical tests from her imprisoned husband to complete the IVF procedure at her own expense.

The lawsuit stated that the petitioner—residing in Fayoum—has been married to the prisoner since 2014, and they shared a stable marital life but faced challenges with delayed conception. After several attempts, she underwent a successful IVF procedure resulting in a pregnancy with triplets. However, her husband’s arrest in January 2015 and his subsequent detention on multiple charges—culminating in a 15-year prison sentence issued in 2022—caused severe psychological distress, leading to the loss of her pregnancy and shattering their dream of parenthood.

According to the lawsuit, the woman, now 36, has declining fertility and is medically unable to conceive naturally. Moreover, she will not be able to reunite with her husband before 2037—the end of his sentence—making IVF her only viable path to motherhood.

The petitioner submitted a formal request to the Minister of Interior and his deputies, offering to cover all costs and emphasizing that the procedure does not violate any legal provisions. However, the authorities failed to respond, prompting her to seek legal support from the Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights.

The lawsuit stressed that the request does not violate any law but rather constitutes a necessary medical procedure consistent with existing legislation that guarantees prisoners’ rights to access healthcare.

It is worth noting that Egyptian law contains no explicit provisions allowing conjugal visits, thereby depriving prisoners of their fundamental marital rights and their ability to conceive children naturally. Although religious edicts affirm that depriving prisoners of such rights is impermissible, the matter of conjugal visits remains subject to the discretion of prison authorities.

In 2017, Egypt’s Al-Azhar Global Center for Electronic Fatwas affirmed that there is no religious prohibition against IVF, considering that the preservation of lineage is one of the fundamental objectives of Islamic law.

In light of this, the Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights reiterates its call for reconsideration of certain policies concerning prisoners’ rights and for ensuring their access to basic human rights, including the right to procreate, in accordance with international human rights standards.