English abstract
This study compared the judicial seizure of public funds in Omani and Egyptian
legislation. To illustrate, it examined the permissibility of preventing the judicial
seizure law of all funds owned by the state, regardless of whether allocated for public
benefit or privately owned by the state. This study concluded that the Omani legislator
applied the non-seizure law to all state-owned funds, regardless of whether they were
allocated for public benefit. On the other hand, the Egyptian legislature limited the
application of this law to funds owned by the state publicly and did not include other
funds. Therefore, the study recommended that the Omani legislature should restrict the
application of the non-seizure law to publicly owned funds; without including
privately owned state funds. That is because of its inconsistency with the legal system
governing the last funds, which allows their judicial seizure.
