Last Update 16:54

Egypt without future elections

Free elections are a cornerstone of any democracy, but in Egypt they face serious challenges, not least illiteracy. Is it time to say honestly, 'No to free elections in Egypt'?

Mohamed Elmenshawy , Sunday 28 Jul 2013
Views: 2026

While many Egyptian intellectuals and politicians are scrambling to present various recipes for a roadmap for the future, everyone agrees on one thing: the need to “hold elections,” both parliamentary and presidential, within the next few months.

This consensus is logical on the outside since frequent free elections are a cornerstone of building any democratic system. Elections are also the only alternative when it comes to a mechanism for the peaceful transfer of power.

Free elections as experienced in Egypt today, however, hold serious challenges. Since the end of former president Hosni Mubarak’s era on 11 February 2011, the people of Egypt were asked five times to stand in long queues to express their opinion freely by choosing among candidates, or voting on a temporary constitutional declaration or new constitution. Egypt’s political experience since 11 February until today has shown the choices of the majority of the citizenry are ignored.

The first experiment was on 19 March 2011 when 77.2 per cent of the electorate approved the constitutional declaration proposed by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). But SCAF went ahead and issued a constitutional declaration that is a different version than what the Egyptian people voted for in a referendum.

The second experiment was in December 2011-January 2012, when millions queued outside ballot stations to vote in parliamentary elections that gave Islamist currents a sweeping victory of more than 70 per cent of the seats. But the elected parliament was dissolved by a court ruling at the beginning of June 2012.

Then came Shura Council elections as the third experiment when the majority once again voted for the same current, giving it more than 80 per cent of seats.

The fourth time around, the presidential elections forced the people of Egypt in the run-offs to choose between two candidates, although nearly 75 per cent of voters did not vote for either candidate in the first round. Mohamed Morsi, representing the political Islam current, won by a slim majority of 51.7 per cent — which was more than US President Barack Obama won with in the same year, at 51.08 per cent of the vote.

The fifth experiment was in December 2012, when the new constitution was approved by 63.8 per cent of voters.

Thus, the experiment of free elections in Egypt shows that representatives of political Islam won an average of more than two thirds of votes in various elections.

This begs two key questions. First, will we continue to use the “mechanism of free elections” in the next phase of Egypt’s political experiment? Or is it better to put it aside, especially since the judiciary or military can annul their outcome if the results are similar to what we witnessed in the past two years? Second, pertaining to the future of political Islamist parties, will they be allowed to contest in the future? Or would it be better to prevent them from participating in elections, especially after they have shown us how successful they are at free elections?

Yes, free elections are not synonymous with democracy, but it is fair to say that free elections are a critical cornerstone and without them we would be talking about something other than the democracy known and practiced around the world. Some say the people of Egypt should wait to practice democracy in the manner of advanced societies, in order to change the culture of political institutions, evolve the culture of the people, build strong political parties, create objective media and build a state of law. But this is what the former regime used to say and what Omar Suleiman claimed during the January 25 Revolution — that the people of Egypt are not prepared to practice democracy until now.

The truth is, there is no sure guarantee for democracy in Egypt except “frequent and just free elections.”

Elections divide society into two camps: “winners” and “losers,” and voters decide the result. Most constitutions around the world uphold the right of adults to exercise civil and political rights. Some countries do not grant the right to vote to all their citizens at once. The US, for example, for many decades only gave Caucasian males above the age of 21 who owned property and paid taxes the right to vote. Women, the poor and non-Caucasians were only allowed to vote much later.

Some believe that in the past two years election results did not reflect Egypt’s reality and argued that nearly 15 million registered voters cannot even read or write, which is about one third of 53 million registered voters. Some Egyptian intellectuals doubted the feasibility of elections with so many illiterates. Positions expressed in tweets by writer Alaa Al-Aswany and statements by Mohamed ElBaradei shed light on the issue of illiteracy, its relation to the exercise of a citizen’s political rights and the outcome of elections.

In an interview with the US-based PBE channel, ElBaradei said: “Today we have an educated middle class on the one hand and on the other a majority known as Islamists and illiterates.” Al-Aswany, meanwhile, tweeted: “Illiterates are our people, we respect them. But they are voting on issues they cannot read. Should we glorify illiteracy or admit it is an obstacle?”

There is no dispute that illiteracy is an obstacle to democracy in general, but the position of Al-Aswany and ElBaradei spontaneously expressed the easy justification for the failure of certain political forces in connecting with voters who are poor and marginalised. Continued illiteracy in Egypt is in fact a good example of the miserable failure of the traditional ruling elite in past decades, and evidence of the end of its mandate in power after a revolution by the people.

Large and influential sectors of Egyptians rejected the mechanism, outcome and essence of free elections, so why the insistence to maintain them in the new roadmap for the future that will rule Egypt after 30 June?

Let us say it courageously and honestly: “No to free elections in Egypt.”

Short link:


Comment's Title
Ahram Online welcomes readers' comments on all issues covered by the site, along with any criticisms and/or corrections. Readers are asked to limit their feedback to a maximum of 1000 characters (roughly 50 words). All comments/criticisms will, however, be subject to the following code
  • We will not publish comments which contain rude or abusive language, libelous statements, slander and personal attacks against any person/s.
  • We will not publish comments which contain racist remarks or any kind of racial or religious incitement against any group of people, in Egypt or outside it.
  • We welcome criticism of our reports and articles but we will not publish personal attacks, slander or fabrications directed against our reporters and contributing writers.
  • We reserve the right to correct, when at all possible, obvious errors in spelling and grammar. However, due to time and staffing constraints such corrections will not be made across the board or on a regular basis.

Hana Zakariya.Cairo University
05-08-2013 04:23am
Military = disaster in governance
Military-backed regimes have had more than 60years to fight illiteracy. Why did they fail? The Islamists may not be angels. but they are a thousand times cleaner than the super lousy military dictatorships.
Comment's Title

30-07-2013 10:19pm
Whom are you cheating?
I am an Egyptian who lived long enough to find out that my people are the most corrupt people on earth. It is about power grap Mister, not any political agenda.The first democratically elected Egyptian in 6,000 years, was sapotaged since day one. Very expensive and elaborate destabilization master plans were in full swing since day one. You wanted him to resolve what he and all of us have inherited from a super corrupt regime, in less than two months??! Those with a little sense of shame have all died out.. Ely Ekhtacho Mato, dear sir. And the curse is going to be yours for the next one hundred years
Comment's Title

Reda Sobky
30-07-2013 07:39pm
Structure determines outcome
As in the title everybody seeks the legitimacy of elections and the process determines the outcome. Who is on the ballot comes first, then comes resources of candidates, religious endorsement, dirty tricks, and then finally appeal to voter. It was very obvious that a ballot that has morsi and shafik on it would lead to disaster as a majority of voters had no candidate to vote for on the ballot except those they do not want so they voted for the least odoious and then impeached and then ejected him through the army better then through street justice similar to Libya and Syria with the price that goes with it in death and destruction.
Comment's Title
Anti Coup
01-08-2013 03:19pm
So majority voted for Sis then ? If you and your like minded foes could not careless for military destruction why now should anyone care if we became like liberia or somalia?

A democrat
29-07-2013 03:49am
Yes to free elections in Egypt
It is a courageous article indeed, but facts contradict it: most of the countries that underwent transitions to democracy since the 1970's had by then large proportions of illiterates: Portugal in 1974 and Brazil in 1985, moments of democratic transitions in these countries, had proportionally as many illiterates by then as Egypt does today: about 35-40%. Nowadays illiteracy in Portugal is below 5%, in Brazil around 10%. Forget America or Britain. From India to Chile, from South Africa to Paraguay, most countries that nowadays hold regular free elections still have large pockets of uneducated voters, but far less than when they were not democracies or independent. Only by allowing illiterates to vote are their concerns taken into consideration by the political institutions (including their condition of illiteracy). Does Egypt want to remain behind those countries? Easy: just reject free elections.
Comment's Title
A democrat
04-08-2013 06:18am
Answer to Democracia
No, Democracia, I did not forget. All developing democracies have political extremists. You have Islamists, those countries had/have Socialists/Communists. The only way to combat radicalism and terrorism is by allowing them to integrate them into mainstream politics.
01-08-2013 01:12pm
You forget...
But you forget, dear Sir, that in all the other countries you mention in your comment, there is no threat that religious extremists coming to power. And you know about, that manipulation especially in the name of religion works especially fine on uneducated people...

© 2010 Ahram Online. Advertising