As Egypt's insurance sector prepares for the imminent elections of the Insurance Federation, the atmosphere remains tense amid growing legal and constitutional questions surrounding the Federation's newly amended bylaws. While much attention has focused on the controversial eligibility of candidates seeking a third term — in potential violation of term limits — the concerns go deeper. Legal experts and industry observers are raising red flags about the absence of basic governance mechanisms, such as an appeals committee, and about inconsistencies between the Federation's internal bylaws and the Unified Insurance Law No. 155 of 2024. A Bylaw Meant for Reform — Yet Stirring Confusion The Federation had introduced its amended bylaws as part of a broader effort to modernise internal regulations and align with legislative reforms aimed at enhancing transparency and governance across the insurance sector. However, stakeholders have since pointed to contradictions between the law and the new bylaws — particularly regarding membership definitions. Article 109 of the Unified Insurance Law clearly limits Federation membership to insurance and reinsurance companies, with no mention of cooperative insurance societies. In contrast, Article 1 of the Federation's bylaws extends membership to include cooperative societies "until they regularise their legal status." This clause has drawn scrutiny, as the law provides no transitional provision for such entities. Legal analysts warn that this could amount to a constitutional inconsistency or at least a regulatory overreach. Term Limit Loopholes and the Call for Fair Play The issue of term limits has also sparked debate. Some candidates are reportedly seeking third terms by switching their company representation — a move critics view as a legal loophole that undermines the spirit of the bylaw, which caps service at two consecutive terms. Meanwhile, other potential candidates have been disqualified based on stricter interpretations of the same rule. The situation has led to appeals and legal challenges, but here lies another troubling gap: the amended bylaws contain no provisions for an appeals process. In any electoral system, such a mechanism is essential for transparency, accountability, and procedural fairness. Observers question how such a critical omission could occur in a bylaw meant to enhance governance. Was it a drafting error — or an intentional exclusion? Sector Calls for Regulatory Clarity and Oversight These legal ambiguities come at a crucial moment for the insurance sector, which plays a vital role in Egypt's economic ecosystem. Industry leaders, legal professionals, and regulatory authorities are now being called upon to intervene and clarify the contested provisions. Without clear interpretation and transparent enforcement of the rules, the integrity of the Federation's elections — and by extension, its governance — risks being compromised. It is now imperative that the Financial Regulatory Authority, along with the Federation's executive board and member companies, step in to ensure that the upcoming elections are conducted on a solid legal foundation that respects the principles of fairness, transparency, and equal opportunity.
