Extradition Between the UAE and Egypt

Key Points

• Egypt’s parliament ratified a new bilateral extradition treaty with the UAE on 9 March 2025, moving beyond the older reliance on the multilateral Riyadh Arab Convention (1983)
• The treaty includes a debated consent requirement: a convicted person (or their close relatives) must approve their own transfer in certain cases
• Dual criminality and a minimum sentence threshold still apply to every request
• Political offenses and torture risk remain recognized, mandatory grounds for refusal
• The treaty’s ratification drew renewed attention to the case of Egyptian-Turkish poet Abdul Rahman al-Qaradawi, held in UAE detention since January 2025

For years, extradition between the UAE and Egypt operated without a direct bilateral treaty, relying instead on the Riyadh Arab Convention on Judicial Cooperation and general principles of reciprocity. That changed in March 2025, when Egypt’s parliament formally ratified a dedicated bilateral extradition treaty — a shift that carries real consequences for anyone facing a request between the two countries.

What Is the Legal Framework for Extradition Between the UAE and Egypt?

Historically, cooperation between the UAE and Egypt on extradition matters was grounded in the Riyadh Arab Convention on Judicial Cooperation (1983), a multilateral framework covering most Arab League states, alongside Federal Law No. 39 of 2006 on the UAE side.

On 9 March 2025, Egypt’s parliament approved a new, dedicated bilateral extradition treaty with the UAE, following approval by its Committee on Constitutional and Legislative Affairs the month before.^[1] The treaty proved contentious during debate: it contains a clause requiring that a person already convicted and sentenced in one country give their own consent (or that of close relatives) before being transferred to the other. Some lawmakers argued this undermines the treaty’s practical force, while the government defended it as consistent with similar international agreements aimed at supporting rehabilitation.

Beyond this clause, the treaty follows familiar principles: dual criminality, a minimum sentence threshold, and formal requests routed through diplomatic and judicial channels rather than direct police-to-police contact.

How Does the Extradition Procedure Work in Practice?

Requests are submitted through the Ministry of Justice or equivalent central authority, accompanied by an arrest warrant or judgment, a statement of facts, evidence, and the relevant legal texts. In urgent cases, an INTERPOL Red Notice can trigger provisional arrest ahead of the full formal file.

The UAE’s Public Prosecution and courts assess dual criminality and procedural completeness; final approval rests with the Minister of Justice, who may weigh humanitarian and diplomatic considerations alongside the court’s findings.

What Are the Grounds for Refusing an Extradition Request?

• Political Offenses — extradition is refused where the underlying conduct is genuinely political in nature, such as protected political expression.
• Risk of Torture or Ill-Treatment — an absolute bar under Article 3 of the UN Convention against Torture, to which both states are signatories.
• Nationality — both countries generally restrict extradition of their own citizens.
• Statute of Limitations — requests are refused where the right to prosecute or enforce a sentence has lapsed.
• Consent Requirement (New Treaty) — under the 2025 treaty, a convicted person’s own approval, or that of close relatives, is required for transfer in defined circumstances.

Context: The Al-Qaradawi Case and the New Treaty

The ratification of the new UAE-Egypt treaty in March 2025 brought renewed public attention to the case of Abdul Rahman al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian-Turkish poet and activist. It’s worth being precise about the facts: al-Qaradawi was extradited from Lebanon to the UAE in January 2025 — not from or to Egypt directly — though Egyptian authorities had also sought his extradition around the same time, in connection with social media comments critical of Egyptian, Emirati, and Saudi officials.^[2]

Human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, and a group of United Nations experts have raised concerns about his prolonged, largely incommunicado detention in the UAE, citing risk of ill-treatment and calling for his release.^[3] Legal analysts have noted that the new treaty’s consent requirement does not automatically mean he will be transferred to Egypt, and that this remains an unresolved, closely watched matter.^[1] The case is a clear illustration of why the political-offense exception and torture-risk safeguards are not procedural formalities — they are often the entire substance of a defense.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there now a direct extradition treaty between the UAE and Egypt?

Yes. Egypt’s parliament ratified a new bilateral extradition treaty with the UAE on 9 March 2025, moving beyond the earlier reliance on the multilateral Riyadh Arab Convention.

Can UAE or Egyptian nationals be extradited under the new treaty?

Generally restricted as a matter of principle. The new treaty additionally requires, in defined circumstances, the consent of a convicted person (or their close relatives) before a transfer takes place — a clause that was heavily debated in Egypt’s parliament.

How does the Al-Qaradawi case relate to this treaty?

Al-Qaradawi was extradited from Lebanon — not Egypt — to the UAE in January 2025, though Egypt had separately sought his extradition. The new bilateral treaty’s ratification renewed attention to his case, though legal analysts note it does not automatically determine his fate.

What are the main grounds for refusing extradition to or from Egypt?

Political offenses, risk of torture or ill-treatment, an expired statute of limitations, and — under the new treaty — the absence of required consent in defined convicted-person transfer cases.

How long does the extradition process typically take?

This is difficult to estimate precisely given how new the bilateral treaty is. Straightforward cases could move within months; cases involving human rights concerns or political sensitivity — as history shows — can extend well beyond a year.