They Fed Them Poisoned Food | February 24: Hearing of ECESR Lawsuit Against Defendants Accused of the Premeditated Killing of Stray Dogs

On February 24, 2026, the Zeitoun Misdemeanor Court will consider Case No. 6867 of 2025 (Zeitoun Misdemeanors), filed by the Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights, acting on behalf of the Our Team for Animal Protection Association, against “Walid A. M.” and “Mohamed A. H.” The case arises from the defendants’ alleged commission of deliberate poisoning, resulting in the death of a number of dogs within the jurisdiction of the Zeitoun Police Station.

The Association had undertaken extensive efforts to rescue stray dogs, vaccinate them, sterilize them, and provide medical treatment. Several days after the completion of these procedures, the defendants allegedly intentionally killed the dogs by placing poisoned food for them. The Association further stated that the defendants had repeatedly threatened its members due to their involvement in animal care and protection activities.

Police investigations, supported by surveillance camera footage, revealed video evidence demonstrating that the defendants deliberately poisoned the dogs, leading to their deaths. Relying on this evidence, the Association filed an official report with the Zeitoun Partial Public Prosecution, and the case was subsequently referred to the Misdemeanor Court for trial.

A lawyer representing the Egyptian Center attended the first hearing before the Misdemeanor Court on February 17, 2026, submitted a civil claim against the defendants, and requested civil compensation. The Court decided to adjourn the case to the session scheduled for February 24, 2026, in order to complete the procedures related to the civil claim.

The Egyptian Constitution explicitly provides for the protection of animal rights and prohibits harm to animals, recognizing them as part of the nation’s natural wealth. It further mandates the protection of animals and wildlife and requires that they be treated humanely, in accordance with the law.

For several years, the Egyptian Center has pursued legal action on the same issue in its capacity as legal counsel for the OR-Team for Animal Protection Association. In this context, it filed Lawsuit No. 2242 of Judicial Year 75 against the President of the Republic, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Health, and the Chairman of the Board of the General Authority for Veterinary Services, all in their official capacities. Through this lawsuit, the Center sought the annulment of the defendants’ negative administrative decision, namely their failure to refrain from using strychnine poison in the killing of dogs and stray animals.

The lawsuit was founded on the argument that the administrative authorities violated the law by using strychnine poison to kill dogs and stray animals without due regard for the lives of these domestic animals, as well as the safety of humans and plant life.

This position was supported by the National Poison Control Center in its recommendation submitted in the same lawsuit, which confirmed the dangers of using strychnine—an internationally banned substance—and emphasized the availability of alternative methods, such as sterilization, for managing stray animal populations.

The case was reviewed before the State Commissioners’ Authority, First Circuit for Rights and Freedoms. The Authority issued a report confirming, based on an official statement from the National Center for Clinical and Environmental Toxicology affiliated with Cairo University Hospitals, that strychnine is a chemical compound extracted from the seeds of a plant known as Strychnos nux-vomica, and that it has been used by the General Authority for Veterinary Services in campaigns to eliminate stray dogs.

The use of strychnine in animal control has been internationally prohibited by accredited research and regulatory bodies, which have called for banning its use due to its extreme toxicity and its harmful effects on soil and human health, not only on animals.

The State Commissioners’ Authority further confirmed that the General Authority for Veterinary Services does in fact use strychnine when euthanizing dogs and stray animals, as established by the official statement issued by the National Center for Clinical and Environmental Toxicology.

The General Authority for Veterinary Services neither denied nor disputed this practice, nor did it submit any evidence to the contrary. Moreover, it refrained from filing a substantive response to the lawsuit, which constitutes a legal presumption supporting the validity of the claimant’s allegations and the documentary evidence submitted, particularly given the absence of any evidence to the contrary in the case file.

The lawsuit also established that the use of strychnine by the General Authority for Veterinary Services in disposing of stray animals constitutes a violation of the explicit provisions of Article 12 of Minister of Agriculture Decree No. 35 of 1967, which regulates procedures relating to dogs, rabies, the monitoring of dangerous animals, and cases of seizure, slaughter, or euthanasia of such animals without compensation to their owners.

Article 12 requires that any method used to dispose of animals must be free from cruelty and torture. Accordingly, the lawsuit sought a judicial ruling obligating the General Authority for Veterinary Services to cease the use of strychnine in disposing of dogs and stray animals in public roads and places.

Despite the State Commissioners’ Authority issuing a clear and reasoned report in favor of prohibiting the use of strychnine poison, the Court ultimately ruled to dismiss the lawsuit on the merits, reasoning that the method was the most suitable given the country’s economic conditions. The Court further denied the existence of any negative environmental impact resulting from the use of strychnine, in contradiction to official national and international reports.