Tuesday 17/February/2026 – 09:44 AM
Prominent judicial sources confirmed in exclusive statements to Cairo 24 that Attorney General Counselor Mohamed Shawky Ayyad is in the process of preparing a circular addressed to the Public Prosecution regarding the ruling issued yesterday, Monday, by the Supreme Constitutional Court regarding the invalidation of the decision of the head of the Egyptian Drug Authority No. 600 of 2023, regarding replacing the tables attached to the decision of the President of the Republic with Law No. 182 of 1960 regarding combating drugs and regulating their use and trafficking, in preparation for circulating the ruling to all prosecutions at the republic level and adopting it regarding investigations and issues related to it.
Decision of the Chairman of the Drug Authority to replace the schedules of the Anti-Narcotics Law
Prominent judicial sources confirm to Cairo 24: The Public Prosecutor is in the process of preparing a periodic letter directed to the Public Prosecution
The Supreme Constitutional Court officially notified the Public Prosecutor of its ruling regarding the invalidity of Decision No. 600 of 2023 by the Chairman of the Egyptian Drug Authority, regarding replacing the tables attached to the President of the Republic’s Decision with Law No. 182 of 1960 regarding combating drugs and regulating their use and trafficking.
The court had ruled that the aforementioned decision was unconstitutional, and also ruled that previous and subsequent decisions issued by the head of the Medicines Authority regarding amending the schedules attached to the same law were invalidated, because they were based on the same constitutional defect.
The court also ruled that the previous and subsequent decisions of the Chairman of the Medicines Authority regarding the unconstitutional decision issued regarding amending the tables attached to the decision of the President of the Republic regarding the aforementioned law shall be invalidated.
One of the criminal chambers of the Court of Cassation had referred the aforementioned decision to the Supreme Constitutional Court to decide on the extent of its constitutionality, as it considered it to be constitutionally flawed.
The court ruled that the referred decision constitutes an infringement on the legislative mandate assigned to the Minister of Health and Population to amend the schedules attached to the Anti-Narcotics Law, stipulated in Article 32 of Law No. 182 of 1960. It also represents a transgression of the limits of the head of the Egyptian Drug Authority replacing the Minister of Health and Population in the powers stipulated in Law No. 127 of 1955 regarding the practice of the pharmacy profession, which is limited to organizing registration, circulation and oversight. Preparations and supplies subject to this law.
The court confirmed that the decision is not based on the text of Article 2 of Law No. 151 of 2019, nor on the text of Article 15 of the Law Establishing the Medicines Authority, which makes it a waste of the principle of the rule of law, a violation of the principle of legality of crimes and punishments, a violation of the principle of separation of powers, and a violation of the texts of Articles (5, 94, 95, and 101) of the Constitution.
The court added that the decisions issued by the head of the Drug Authority to amend the schedules attached to the Anti-Narcotics Law, prior to and subsequent to the decision declaring it unconstitutional, are marred by the same constitutional defects, and must therefore be overturned.
The court concluded its ruling by declaring the unconstitutionality of the decision and the invalidation of the decisions related to it as if they were considered as if they had not existed since their issuance, while the tables attached to the decision of the President of the Republic by Law No. 182 of 1960 and its amendments remain valid and effective after the instrument of its repeal is invalidated, and they are applied in criminal cases that were the subject of the application of the Anti-Narcotics Law for incidents that were seized during the period in which the decision ruling was unconstitutional was implemented, until they are amended or replaced. With a valid legal instrument.
