On 27 October 2026 the New Cairo Misdemeanour Court ordered the closure of Mada Masr, confiscated its equipment and fined editor-in-chief Lina Attalah EGP 3 million, about $53,400, for running a website without a licence (Al Jazeera). Under Article 105 of the 2018 media law, the penalty for this offence ranges from EGP 1 million to 3 million, plus closure and confiscation. Attalah got the maximum. Her separate retrial on false-news charges was set for 11 November. RSF reports it was postponed to 18 November after the defence asked the judge to recuse himself (RSF).
The strongest case for licensing
Licensing is not illegitimate in itself. Many democracies license broadcasters that use scarce spectrum. Regulators can reasonably want to know who owns a news outlet, who is accountable for what it publishes, and where a person harmed by defamation or fraud can seek redress. Egypt's Law No. 180 of 2018 on Press, Media and the Supreme Council for Media Regulation (SCMR) was published in the Official Gazette on 27 August 2018. Its defenders can say it puts online media under the same accountability framework as print and television.
That argument holds only if the licensing gate works as a neutral registry. The Mada Masr record shows it does not.
A licence that can be neither obtained nor refused cleanly
According to Al Jazeera's account, Mada Masr applied to the SCMR in 2018 and again in 2020 and got no reply. It learned of a rejection only when prosecutors cited it in an earlier case in 2022. In 2023 an administrative court upheld the refusal, citing the absence of proof that its trademark was registered. Mada Masr's lawyer says he filed a registration certificate. A new application has been pending since June 2023.
The outlet has therefore spent years in a position where the regulator has the discretion to say yes, no or nothing, and the criminal courts punish it for the absence of a yes. The SCMR does not lose by delaying. It collects a conviction instead. Amnesty International put the principle plainly: "International human rights standards are clear on the fact that registration systems should not be used as a mechanism of prior restraint or to pick and choose which media outlets governments like and which they wish to silence" (Amnesty).
The fee structure points the same way. The 2020 executive regulations (Council of Ministers Resolution No. 418 of 2020) set licensing fees of EGP 250,000 for a media outlet and EGP 50,000 for a website, according to the Official Gazette text hosted by WIPO Lex. Those figures come from the Arabic text and are not a proportionate cost for a small independent newsroom. They are a recurring cost on top of the open-ended approval risk.
The penalty is not proportionate to the offence
Even if one accepts a licensing duty, the remedy matters. Closing an entire newsroom and seizing its equipment because of an administrative gap treats a paperwork failure as if it were a harm to the public. Amnesty states that "under no circumstances is shutting down a media outlet a proportionate response to operating without government authorization." A civil fine, a compliance order with a deadline, or a duty on the regulator to decide within a set period would each address accountability without ending the publication.
The due-process record adds to the concern. Amnesty says the judge refused to adjourn so the defence could prepare. It says he also refused requests to submit documents or summon witnesses. Mada Masr says he appointed a lawyer for Attalah over her objection, although eight of her own lawyers were present. These are the outlet's claims as reported by Al Jazeera, and the rest of the account comes from Amnesty. Mada Masr is appealing the ruling.
A wider pattern, not an isolated case
The Committee to Protect Journalists said on 23 October that 25 journalists were behind bars in Egypt, the highest number since 2021. Authorities arrested the staff of the fact-checking outlet Matsadaash in late September. Prosecutors told them they face charges of joining and funding terrorism and spreading false news. RSF ranks Egypt 169th of 180 countries (RSF). It did not state the index year on the page I read.
The licensing rules also sit alongside Article 19 of the same law. According to Association for Freedom of Thought and Expression (AFTE) analysis from 2019, Article 19 lets the SCMR block a website, blog or personal account that violates the law. It also covers personal accounts with 5,000 or more followers. Together, the two provisions give the state a licensing gate at the front end and a blocking power afterwards.
What proportionate regulation would look like
- Decide within a deadline. A licence application should have a statutory response time, written reasons for any refusal, and deemed approval if the regulator does not answer.
- Make refusal reviewable on the merits. A trademark-registration technicality should not be enough to sink a news outlet. Courts should be able to examine whether the regulator acted consistently.
- Reserve closure for serious, proven harms. Unlicensed operation should draw civil penalties and a compliance period, not criminal fines of up to EGP 3 million, confiscation or closure.
- Drop website licensing for news altogether. Registration of ownership is enough for accountability. A permission regime for publishing online adds nothing the defamation and fraud laws do not already provide.
The retrial scheduled for 18 November will test whether a second charge, publishing false news, adds to the case. The closure ruling shows what a licensing regime does when the regulator is both gatekeeper and prosecutor's witness. Egypt can pursue accountability for online publishers without it, and that route would not require ending independent reporting.