In recent days, social media platforms in Egypt, most notably TikTok, Facebook, and Instagram, have been swept by a wave of personal photos generated by artificial intelligence technologies, showing ordinary users wearing the military uniform of members of the Egyptian Armed Forces, with ranks, badges, and medals they did not receive, and in combat or celebratory scenes they did not experience. These “apps” and “prompts” have become very popular among young people, as a type of digital entertainment or an expression of national pride and belonging.

However, this rapid spread, which at first glance appears to be an innocent activity that does not go beyond the limits of entertainment, hides behind it serious legal risks that many users of this technology may not realize. Egyptian law does not leave the issue of uniforms, ranks, and official insignia of the armed forces and police unregulated. Rather, it provides them with special criminal protection, the effects of which extend, depending on the circumstances surrounding the incident, to include artificially generated digital images that are no less dangerous than real uniforms, and may even be even more dangerous, given their ease of dissemination and the difficulty of distinguishing them from the truth.

In this context, International Consultations Group for Training and Legal Services (ICG) is presenting this analytical article, with the aim of raising awareness among individuals, companies, and digital influencers of the legal limits of this phenomenon, reviewing the legislative frameworks that govern it, and accessing the advisory and legal services that the group can provide to protect its clients from criminal accountability that may be unexpected.

First: Why does military uniform receive such strict legal protection?

The Egyptian legislator does not view military uniforms, badges, and ranks as merely a piece of cloth or a formal symbol, but rather as an embodiment of the prestige and authority of the state, and a symbol of the citizen’s confidence in a military and security institution to which membership is supposed to be limited to those who have passed the procedures for enrollment, qualification, and official accreditation. Therefore, allowing anyone to wear this outfit, even symbolically, virtually, or through an artificial image, represents an infringement on this prestige and opens the door to dangerous possibilities, most notably:

• Impersonation: Such an appearance may be exploited to deceive others or gain trust that its owner does not deserve.
• Defamation of the military establishment: through inappropriate contexts or uses of uniforms.
• Media confusion and misinformation: Especially in light of the spread of images generated by artificial intelligence that are difficult to distinguish from real images, which may lead to the dissemination of false information or impressions about military movements or specific individuals.
• Potential security exploitation: Military and security sources have repeatedly warned of the dangers of circulating military uniforms, fabrics, or their shapes, as this may result in exploitation by hostile parties or elements.

Second: The legislative framework governing this phenomenon in Egyptian law

Penal Code

The Penal Code, promulgated by Law No. 58 of 1937 and its amendments, is the primary reference in this regard, specifically in the following articles:

• Article 155: Anyone who interferes in a public function, whether civil or military, without having an official capacity from the government or its permission to do so, or performs an act of this function, shall be criminalized, and a penalty of imprisonment shall be imposed for that.
• Article 156: This is the cornerstone of this issue, as it stipulates that “anyone who publicly wears official clothing without holding the rank that entitles him to do so, or publicly carries the distinctive mark of a job or position without right,” shall be punished with imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year. Although the traditional wording of the text refers to actual “clothing,” jurisprudence and jurisprudence tend, when interpreting criminal texts related to plagiarism and misinformation, to take into account the purpose of criminalization, which is to protect the prestige of a military position or rank from exploitation or forgery, regardless of the means by which such exploitation is achieved, whether traditional or digital.
• Articles 157 and 158: It is criminalized to unjustly receive medals, decorations, titles and ranks.

Military Judgments Law

Under Article 5 (Paragraph B) of the Military Judgments Law, the military judiciary is competent to consider crimes committed against equipment, missions, weapons, ammunition, documents and secrets of the armed forces and all their related matters. This reflects the seriousness with which the legislator deals with this type of behavior, as it removes it from the scope of the ordinary judiciary to the scope of a specialized judiciary that is more stringent in its procedures and rulings.

Anti-Information Technology Crimes Law No. 175 of 2018

As the phenomenon moves from actually “wearing an outfit” to “generating and publishing” images online, this law becomes the most appropriate framework for prosecuting this type of behavior. The law defines “national security” broadly, encompassing everything that affects the nation’s independence, unity, and territorial integrity. It grants competent authorities the authority to block content or accounts that pose a threat to national security or endanger the country. It also establishes criminal penalties for creating, managing, or using accounts or websites with the intent to commit or incite any of the crimes stipulated therein.

Accordingly, an AI-generated image that shows a person in military uniform in a misleading context, or is published in a manner that suggests its authenticity and raises confusion, panic, or skepticism among official bodies, may fall under this law, especially if the publication is accompanied by the intent to offend, mislead, or disturb public order.

Anti-terrorism laws

In more sensitive contexts, when the publication of such images is accompanied by content related to ongoing military or security operations, anti-terrorism legislation falls under the category of liability, as these laws impose severe penalties for publishing or promoting false news or statements regarding terrorist operations or security confrontations that violate official statements issued by the competent authorities.

Third: Where does the real danger lie in “artificial intelligence” images?

Some may ask: Aren’t these just digitally generated images, not related to the actual wearing of a real outfit, so how can they be subject to the same legal logic that governs the actual outfit? The answer to this lies in several fundamental considerations:

1. Difficulty distinguishing between real and artificial: Image generation techniques have reached such a high level that it is difficult for the naked eye, and sometimes even for specialized technical tools, to distinguish between real and generated images, making their misleading effect similar to, if not more dangerous than, real clothing.
2. Contextual repurposing: An image posted with the intent of “national pride” or “entertainment” could be reused by other parties, inside or outside Egypt, in misleading or offensive contexts, to spread rumors, or even for blackmail or impersonation purposes, especially if the image includes specific ranks, badges, or unit names.
3. Crossing the line between “selfie” and “digital impersonation”: When a person attaches a comment suggesting their actual affiliation with the armed forces, or uses the image in a commercial or advertising context or for undue gain or credibility, the issue shifts from “entertainment” to behavior that may fall under the category of legally criminalized impersonation.
4. Use by abusive or hostile parties: This is what many Egyptian security sources have warned against, as the escalation of this phenomenon can be exploited to create a state of information chaos, or to pass on misleading content that is difficult for the average public to quickly refute.
5. The international and cross-border dimension: Images generated by artificial intelligence do not know geographical borders, as they may be published from within Egypt and turn within hours into material circulated on international platforms, and they may be used in contexts related to false news about ongoing regional conflicts, which increases the possibility of applying stricter texts such as those contained in anti-terrorism and national security laws.

Fourth: Who bears legal responsibility?

It is important to emphasize that legal liability is not necessarily limited to the initial creator of the image, but can extend, depending on the circumstances of each individual incident, to:

• The person appearing in the image, if it is proven that he was the one who generated it or requested that it be generated and published.
• Anyone who republishes or promotes the image in a way that suggests its authenticity or contributes to misleading the public, especially if he has a large number of followers or a page of a news or advertising nature.
• Entities or accounts that use these images for commercial or advertising purposes (such as promoting applications or products) without a clear explanation of the nature of the artificial image.
• Providers of application and platform services that enable the generation of such images, if it is proven that they knew about their misuse or deliberately facilitated it, in accordance with Article 36 of the Anti-Information Technology Crimes Law regarding the liability of legal persons.

Fifth: Practical recommendations for individuals and institutions

In light of the above, International Consultations Group for Training and Legal Services (ICG) recommends the following:

• Avoid generating or publishing any personal photos in military or police uniform, even for the purpose of entertainment or expressing national affiliation, given the ambiguity of the legal dividing line between “innocent expression” and “impersonation.”
• Refrain from attaching these images to actual ranks, badges, or unit names, as this poses additional risks.
• Use extreme caution when reposting or circulating any similar images that are widely circulated, and verify their source before sharing.
• Media and advertising companies and institutions should avoid using this type of image in any marketing campaigns or institutional content without specialized legal advice.
• In the event of being held accountable or investigated because of an image of this kind, you should immediately request specialized legal advice, and not make any statements or declarations before that.

Sixth: How can ICG Group be your legal partner in this file?

Based on the belief of International Consultations Group for Training and Legal Services (ICG) that legal awareness is the first line of defense against emerging digital risks, the group provides its clients, including individuals, companies, and media and digital institutions, with an integrated package of services in this field, including:

• Providing advance advice to individuals, influencers, and digital content creators about the limits of using artificial intelligence in producing content related to symbols and uniforms, ensuring that unintended legal violations are avoided.
• Review advertising campaigns and promotional content of companies and brands before publishing it, to ensure that it is free of any elements that may raise criminal or civil liability, especially with regard to the use of images or symbols of an official or military nature.
• Representing individuals and institutions before the Public Prosecution and the competent judiciary (regular or military, depending on jurisdiction) in cases related to crimes of impersonation, wearing official uniforms without justification, or cybercrimes related to them, starting from the investigation stage until the issuance of the final ruling.
• Organizing specialized training programs and workshops, directed at companies, digital marketing agencies, and content creators, on the legal dimensions of using artificial intelligence technologies in producing visual content, including intellectual property rights, data protection, and criminal risks associated with impersonating official symbols.
• Assisting individuals and companies affected by the misuse of their photos or visual identity via artificial intelligence technologies, through legal procedures to report violating content and demand its removal, and coordination with the authorities responsible for combating information technology crimes.
• Providing legal advice to startups and technology platforms working in the field of generating images with artificial intelligence, on how to establish usage policies that limit the misuse of their technologies in producing content that may constitute a violation of Egyptian law.

Conclusion

The rapid development of artificial intelligence technologies opens up broad horizons for creativity and digital expression, but at the same time it places individuals and institutions before new legal responsibilities that they were not familiar with before. What may seem like a passing “trend” on social media platforms may turn – without its owner noticing – into a criminal incident that requires accountability before civilian or military courts.