CAIRO: Egypt's parliament on Tuesday approved constitutional amendments allowing general-turned-president Abdel Fattah El-Sisi to stay in power until 2030, state media reported.
Deputies also backed other sweeping changes to the constitution including to give the military greater influence in political life as well as granting El-Sisi more control over the judiciary.
The amendments are expected to be put to a public referendum later this month.
"The president's current term shall expire at the end of six years from the date of his election as president in 2018," reported the official Al-Ahram news website and broadcaster Nile TV.
"He can be re-elected for another (six-year) term."
El-Sisi led the army's overthrow of elected president Mohamed Morsi in 2013 following mass protests against the Islamist leader's rule.
He won his first term as president in 2014 and was re-elected in March 2018 with more than 97 percent of the vote, after standing virtually unopposed.
Mohamed Abu Hamed, a member of parliament who pushed for the constitutional amendments to keep El-Sisi in power, was adamant the changes were needed to allow him to complete political and economic reforms.
"The constitution in 2014 was written under tough exceptional circumstances," he told AFP.
The deputy hailed El-Sisi as a president who "took important political, economic and security measures... (and) must continue with his reforms," in the face of the unrest gripping neighbouring countries.
The vote comes after two veteran presidents were ousted in Algeria and Sudan and amid an escalation of the conflict in Libya.
Keeping El-Sisi in power, he added, reflected "the will of the people".
State-run Al-Ahram news website said several MPs carried Egyptian flags as they gathered for the vote inside the parliament while nationalistic songs played in the background.
The amendments were initially introduced in February by a parliamentary bloc supportive of El-Sisi and updated this week after several rounds of debates.
Prior to the amendments, Egypt's 2014 constitution stipulated only two four-year presidential terms.
The 596-seat parliament, which is dominated by El-Sisi loyalists, was elected in 2015, about a year after El-Sisi took office.
Since El-Sisi overthrew Morsi, Egypt has drawn heavy criticism for its sweeping crackdown on dissent. El-Sisi's supporters say tough measures have been necessary as the country battles an extremist insurgency and has suffered bloody militant attacks against both the security forces and civilians, including churches.
As lawmakers debated the proposed changes, prominent dissident actors Khaled Abol Naga and Amr Waked denounced them as a power grab.
If passed, "these amendments would take us back to a dictatorship fit for the Middle Ages," Waked told a news conference by rights groups in Geneva.
Amnesty International has warned the constitutional amendments "would worsen the devastating human rights crisis Egyptians are already facing".
"They would grant President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and security forces free rein to further abuse their powers and suppress peaceful dissent for years to come," said Amnesty's Magdalena Mughrabi.
Other constitutional amendments include a quota for women's representation of no less than 25 percent in parliament and forming a second parliamentary chamber.
Egypt parliament votes to extend El-Sisi rule
Egypt parliament votes to extend El-Sisi rule
- The proposed amendments were initially introduced in February by a parliamentary bloc supportive of Abdel Fattah El-Sisi
- The amendments are expected to be put to a public referendum later this month
Sudan defense minister dismisses ‘intelligence document’ as fabrication after convoy strike
- Gen. Hassan Kabroun tells Arab News claims that army hid weapons in aid convoy are “completely false”
RIYADH: Sudan’s defense minister has firmly denied reports attributed to Sudanese intelligence alleging that a convoy targeted in North Kordofan was secretly transporting weapons under the cover of humanitarian aid.
Gen. Hassan Kabroun described the claims as “false” and an attempt to distract from what he called a militia crime.
The controversy erupted after news reports emerged that a document attributed to Sudan’s General Intelligence Service claimed the convoy struck in Al-Rahad on Friday was not a purely humanitarian mission, but was instead carrying “high-quality weapons and ammunition” destined for Sudanese Armed Forces units operating in the state.
The report further alleged that the convoy had been outwardly classified as humanitarian in order to secure safe passage through conflict zones, and that the Rapid Support Forces had destroyed it after gathering intelligence on its route and cargo.
Kabroun categorically rejected the narrative.
“First of all, we would like to stress the fact that this news is false,” he told Arab News. “Even the headline that talks about the security of the regions, such as Al-Dabbah, is not a headline the army would use.”
He described the document as fabricated and politically motivated, saying it was designed to “cover up the heinous crime they committed.”
The minister affirmed that the area targeted by drones is under full control of the Sudanese Armed Forces and does not require any covert military transport.
“Second, we confirm that the region that was targeted by drones is controlled by the army and very safe,” Kabroun said. “It does not require transporting any military equipment using aid convoys as decoys because it is a safe area controlled by the army, which has significant capabilities to transport humanitarian aid.”
According to the minister, the Sudanese military has both the logistical capacity and secure routes necessary to move equipment openly when needed.
“The army is professional and does not need to deliver anything to Kadugli or Dalang on board aid convoys,” he said. “The road between Dalang and Kadugli is open. The Sudanese forces used that road to enter and take control of the region. The road is open and whenever military trucks need to deliver anything, they can do so without resorting to any form of camouflage.”
Kabroun further rejected any suggestion that the military uses humanitarian operations as cover.
“Aid is transported by dedicated relief vehicles to the areas in need of this assistance,” he said. “Aid is not transported by the army. The army and security apparatus do not interfere with relief efforts at all, and do not even accompany the convoys.”
He stressed that the Sudanese Armed Forces maintains a clear institutional separation between military operations and humanitarian work, particularly amid the country’s crisis.
“These are false claims,” he said. “This fake news wanted to cover up the heinous crime they committed.”
Sudan has been gripped by conflict since April 2023, when fighting broke out between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces, plunging the country into what the United Nations has described as one of the world’s worst humanitarian disasters.
The latest dispute over the convoy comes amid intensified fighting in South Kordofan, a strategically sensitive region linking central Sudan with the contested areas of Darfur and Blue Nile.
The false report suggested that intelligence monitoring had enabled the RSF to strike what it described as a military convoy disguised as humanitarian aid. But Kabroun dismissed that version outright.
“The intelligence agency is well aware of its duties,” he said. “The Sudanese Army has enough weapons and equipment to use in the areas of operations. These claims are completely false.”
He argued that the narrative being circulated seeks to shift blame for attacks on civilian infrastructure and humanitarian movements.
“This shows that they are trying to cover up the atrocities,” he added, referring to the militia.
Kabroun maintained that the army has regained momentum on multiple fronts and remains fully capable of sustaining its operations without resorting to deception.
“The region is secure, the roads are open, and the army does not need camouflage,” he said. “We are operating professionally and transparently.”
“These claims are completely false,” Kabroun said. “The Sudanese Army does not use humanitarian convoys for military purposes.”
