Egyptian Sudan 66 and the maintenance of the eight properties, and specifically recognized the 1882 condominium agreement by not asking for anything for itself. It supported the 1892 decree that prohibits Egypt from ceding any Egyptian land. It also recognized that Sudanese properties are purely Egyptian properties, and explicitly stated this in its agreement with the Belgian Congo government (May 12, 1894). It used this argument against France in the Fashoda crisis in 1898. From these aspects as well, after the 1899 agreement, it was invalid. Above all this, this agreement usurped the rights that the states had acquired through its articles 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11, because it prevented the application of the mixed courts' rulings to Sudan, which is Egyptian land, and prohibited the appointment of consuls without England's permission, as well as the rights of European merchants and landowners. It is worth mentioning in this regard that when France occupied Tunisia and extended its protection over it, it could not abolish the privileges except after negotiating with the states and reaching an agreement with them. Similarly, the English claim of conquest is a false claim because Sudan, during the 16 years of the Mahdist and Khalifa's revolt, was not owned by the properties, as Egypt had not relinquished this ownership. And when the French claimed this in the Fashoda crisis, England objected to their claims, and the French accepted the English argument. As for the claim of restoration by conquest, this is valid for Egypt alone, because Egypt is the sole owner, and it alone has the right to reclaim its property.