(Photo: David Degner)
Today red index fingers paint Egypt. They are symbolic marks for the post-Mubarak era changes, however as the indelible ink that stains voters’ skin at the polls wears off after 24 hours, so will the guises the elections as “fair.”
After ten days of demonstrations in Tahrir Square and major cities across Egypt, which killed 41 people and wounded thousands, the Egyptian government opened polls for the first day of three tiers of elections that will take place through March 2012. This last wave of mass dissidence in Egyptian cities also included a ninth bombing of a gas pipeline with Israel (the second bombing in the last two weeks). Some Egyptian groups are boycotting the elections, including the Democratic Coalition, who called the three-tiered process with reserved seats for independents in a third of the parliament as “independents and candidates from the old regime.”
The elections process is complicated. There are over 10,000 candidates from 50 political parties. The country is divided into three voting districts, with different polling dates, and voting takes place over a two-day period, with no international election monitors. Under Mubarak, international observers were deemed unconstitutional, and in 2007 a system of staining voter’s index fingers with a red indelible ink was implemented. The red is used in other countries, Iraq and India, and it’s use is to stop election fraud by ensuring voters only vote once. However, the ink wears away after 24 hours, and with two days of elections the major source of accountability is mute. The red ink is not only a symbol of change, but a symbol of no change; as it blends itself out of existence, so does the guise of fair elections, with social trust from the people, and political accountability from the parties.
In July, international observers were scheduled to bring delegations to monitor the elections, however the SCAF military government canceled the observers, and transferred the monitoring process to the SCAF controlled judiciary. Earlier this month, there was a brief possibility of a delegation from Occupy Wall St., where $29,000 was allocated to monitor elections, however the funds were rescinded following an open letter from Egyptian activist citing “confusion” over the move to monitor elections, and the rumors of U.S. government involvement in using the Occupy Wall St. movement to legitimize the elections of a “puppet parliament”.
The Muslim Brotherhood (Ikwan) and the Wafd Party also allege that widespread voter fraud took place in the first day of polling, where in previous elections the Muslim Brotherhood won 20% of the vote, this time, they have yet to win one seat. Abdel Galil el-Sharnoub from the Muslim Brotherhood said “the elections revealed the real intention of the regime – to unilaterally take over the Egyptian political arena.” The elections reveal that SCAF similar to Mubarak not only in brutal crackdowns, but in politics.
The military is not going anywhere and it’s not transferring power to anyone. Everything else is detail. When Mubarak was deposed, it was the military doing it. Now it’s surprise time for the Brothers that were tricked by both the military and the US.
Vote fraud is always a possibility, sadly. The people need to make sure that their vote is counted correctly. That’s a lot harder than getting the right to vote in the first place.
over 10,000 candidates from 50 political parties.
eee gads.
thanks for a comprehensive article about a confusing election process that sounds ripe for fraud.
Egypt imports 21 tons of tear gas from the US, port staff refuses to sign for it
a little present from the US to egypt (not the egyptians) on election day.
I’m a journalist based in Cairo and this post contains serious factual mistakes.
“Some Egyptian groups are boycotting the elections, including the Democratic Coalition, who called the three-tiered process with reserved seats for independents in a third of the parliament as “independents and candidates from the old regime.”
Seats were reserved for independents in an early draft of the electoral law — in the final draft, one third is simply reserved for individual candidates (belonging to a party or not), as opposed to 2/3 reserved for party lists. The Democratic Coalition, or Democratic Alliance, is the Muslim-Brotherhood-led list and most certainly did not boycott the elections.
“…voting takes place over a two-day period, with no international election monitors. In July, international observers were scheduled to bring delegations to monitor the elections, however the SCAF military government canceled the observers, and transferred the monitoring process to the SCAF controlled judiciary.”
NDI, The Carter Center and two other international organizations (I can’t remember the names) were allowed to observe the elections. Judicial supervision of elections is a long-standing tradition and viewed by many Egyptians as the main guarantee of electoral integrity — the return of judicial supervision was a demand of the Jan 25 revolution, was approved by popular referendum last March and was always part of the plan. The judges oversee the voting process and their presence bears no relation to international observers. There were hundreds if not thousands of domestic monitors.
“The Muslim Brotherhood (Ikwan) and the Wafd Party also allege that widespread voter fraud took place in the first day of polling, where in previous elections the Muslim Brotherhood won 20% of the vote, this time, they have yet to win one seat.”
I have seen no such allegations. There have been reports of irregularities, some violence, campaigning infractions and logistical shortcomings but most parties — and the Brotherhood in particular — have been very celebratory of the entire process. The Muslim Brothers haven’t won a seat — no one has won a seat — because the election results aren’t out yet (they are expected on Wednesday).
It may that fraud took place during these elections. But we don’t know yet. This article presents incorrect information about the election process and the positions and statements of Egyptians parties.