The Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights has filed a lawsuit before the Administrative Court on behalf of citizen Sara S. A. against the Prime Minister, the Minister of Social Solidarity, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Insurance, and the Chairperson of Nasser Social Bank. The claim seeks to annul the implicit administrative decision to refrain from increasing the maximum alimony disbursed by Nasser Social Bank to divorced women and their children pursuant to final alimony judgments.<\/p>\n
The facts of the case reveal that the plaintiff, a mother of two, obtained final court rulings awarding her a monthly alimony of EGP 1,000 for her two children. However, she was unable to enforce the judgment against the children\u2019s father and consequently sought enforcement through Nasser Social Bank, as provided by law. To her dismay, the Bank limited the monthly disbursement to EGP 500, citing Minister of Justice Decree No. 2722 of 2004, which has for years capped alimony payments per family at that amount\u2014regardless of the judgment\u2019s value, the number of dependents, or prevailing socio-economic conditions.<\/p>\n
The lawsuit argues that Nasser Social Bank, established as a public authority mandated to support vulnerable groups, has failed to adjust the alimony ceiling in response to economic developments. It continues to apply a maximum limit of EGP 500 per month\u2014an amount insufficient to meet even the most basic needs of children\u2014despite nearly two decades passing since the ceiling was established and despite the Bank\u2019s significant financial growth.<\/p>\n
The petition contends that the continuation of this outdated policy constitutes a flagrant violation of the Egyptian Constitution, which obliges the State to protect the family, motherhood, and childhood. It also breaches Egypt\u2019s obligations under international human rights conventions, which guarantee the right of children and their mothers to a dignified life and to receive the alimony awarded by judicial rulings.<\/p>\n
The lawsuit further challenges the Bank\u2019s practice of requiring beneficiaries to submit the original enforceable copy of the alimony judgment as a precondition for payment, thereby depriving mothers of their right to pursue additional enforcement avenues to collect the full amount due.<\/p>\n
The Center underscores that the Bank\u2019s decision to maintain the alimony cap at EGP 500\u2014an amount equivalent to approximately USD 100 in 2004\u2014has become grossly inadequate due to the depreciation of the Egyptian pound and the rise in living costs. This inadequacy is especially pronounced given that the national minimum wage has increased to EGP 7,000 per month as of 2025.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, the lawsuit seeks to compel the competent authorities to raise the maximum alimony ceiling in line with economic indicators such as exchange rates, minimum wage levels, or inflation indices, in a manner that ensures recipient families are guaranteed a minimum standard of decent living. The suit also highlights the significant growth in the funding sources of the Family Insurance Fund\u2014which manages these disbursements\u2014due to the expansion of fees and taxes earmarked for this purpose.<\/p>\n
It is worth noting that the Family Insurance Fund, affiliated with Nasser Social Bank, was established under Law No. 11 of 2004 to protect families from the risks posed by non-payment of alimony by husbands or fathers. Nevertheless, the Bank\u2019s ongoing enforcement of an outdated and arbitrarily low ceiling has faced widespread human rights criticism, as it obstructs the enforcement of judicial rulings and exacerbates the hardship of female-headed households and their children.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Egyptian Center for Economic and Social Rights has filed a lawsuit before the Administrative Court on behalf of citizen Sara S. A. against the Prime Minister, the Minister of Social Solidarity, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Insurance, and the Chairperson of Nasser Social Bank. The claim seeks to annul the implicit administrative …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":808561,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[562],"tags":[],"coauthors":[936],"class_list":["post-808643","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n