Narrow by
Use this menu to filter your search results. Check boxes below to return search results related to any combination of issue and regional interest.
Issues
Regions
Stay Connected to Sada Subscribe Sada is published in English and Arabic and available as articles are published or in a weekly digest.
Enter name and address (All fields are required)
Select Delivery
x
Egypt
 Print
 

Sada - Analysis

The Future of Egypt’s Electoral Law

عربي

Negotiations over Egypt’s electoral law will be the first test of the constitution’s durability.

 

The architects of Egypt’s transition and those responsible for drafting the constitution have given little thought to the future of the country’s electoral law—a critical component of sustainable democracy. Seemingly bigger issues have come to dominate the attention of decision makers in recent months: curbing institutional interests, checking the power of the military, and holding a broader debate on the role of religion in politics. Debate over these issues has come at the expense of discussing inclusive laws regulating elections and the legitimate transfer of political power. 

The Supreme Constitutional Court’s (SCC) dissolution of the People’s Assembly in June prompted renewed interest in a vibrant, competitive legislature that balances executive power. New elections are likely to take place shortly after the constitution is ratified—possibly before the end of the year. The Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) has vowed to field candidates in every district, and talks of coordination with Salafi candidates were reported last week. Liberal and secular groups are also discussing some form of electoral coalition, but a unified alternative to Islamist parties seems unlikely. The battle lines have been drawn: the FJP will point to its success in quieting the military, while liberals and leftists will protest against the Brotherhood’s dominance of state institutions.

Despite these maneuvers, there has been little interest in the development of an equitable, consensus-driven electoral law. In new democracies, electoral laws have a profound impact on the development of political parties, government effectiveness, and the provision of social services. An example of this is Iraq’s poorly negotiated electoral law, the framework for parliamentary elections in 2005 and 2010, which has contributed to the country’s problematic transition. Similarly, last summer, negotiations over Egypt’s electoral law led to a system intentionally designed to empower remnants of the old regime, weaken national party lists, and confuse voters (of whom, according to the UNDP, about a third are illiterate). As Egyptians prepare for a new round of elections, three issues will likely determine the fate of the electoral law—and electoral politics for the foreseeable future.

First, there is considerable debate over how the electoral law will be negotiated. Historically, the People’s Assembly was responsible for drafting a “People’s Assembly Law” and producing amendments as necessary. However, with Morsi’s assumption of legislative authority after the elections, the process has become much more complicated. Morsi will likely lead negotiations with a number of political parties and MPs on the precise nature of the electoral system as the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) did last summer. If this process fails, Morsi could even issue a law unilaterally. Doing so could undermine the integrity of the elections altogether and cause some groups to boycott the elections entirely.

Alternatively, the Constituent Assembly can incorporate elections-related principles into the constitution, limiting the range of electoral design possibilities Morsi could consider. There is some historical precedent for this; in 2007, Mubarak encouraged the passage of constitutional amendments that would allow any electoral law to determine the balance between proportional list (PR) and individual candidacy seats. As this could render the law difficult to change in the future, such an option is markedly less desirable. 

Second, the issue of the People’s Assembly’s controversial worker-farmer quota could be a cause for concern, especially given the general underrepresentation of labor interests in the last PA. Debate over the quota began again in late August, when Constituent Assembly member Manal al-Tibi claimed that the quota was “on its way to being scrapped altogether.” Several leftist and labor groups, along with a number of labor unions, criticized the move and denounced the lack of attention given to labor concerns.

In practice, the quota is largely a Nasserist holdover that functioned more to confuse and constrain voter choice than provide any genuine representation of labor interests in parliament. The institution itself is largely corrupt, as local agricultural cooperatives and trade unions are the only entities capable of awarding either worker or farmer status. Most political parties believe the quota does not empower the working class, instead allowing those with money and power at the local level to manipulate the electoral process.

Last, the electoral law will need to detail the more technical design considerations related to the electoral formula and the size of electoral districts. In negotiations with the SCAF last summer, most parties demanded a completely list-based (PR) system, fearing the old regime’s electoral machine in individual candidate districts. As it turned out, the FJP did far better than expected in these districts – most of which featured run-offs between the FJP and their Salafi rivals. Still, there appears to be consensus amongst the FJP, Nour, and their liberal competitors that a PR system with larger districts is more likely to produce a more diverse, representative parliament. 

Regardless, while proportional representation would almost certainly lead to a more pluralistic parliament, there is a strong jurisprudential tradition in Egyptian constitutional law necessitating that independents have the same opportunities to get elected as party members. The SCC’s decision to dissolve the PA in June rested on this logic. As the SCC claimed in its verdict:

There is no doubt that establishing this competition had a definite impact and reciprocal effect on the two-thirds allocated for closed party lists, since if political parties were not competing with independents over that other portion, then a rearrangement would have taken place within the party lists, taking into account the priorities within each party. Furthermore, political party members had the choice between two ways to run for the People's Assembly, the closed party-list system and the individual candidacy system. Independents were deprived of one of these ways, and their rights were limited to the portion allotted for the individual candidacy system, in which political party members also competed.

Essentially, this means that if Morsi adopts the electoral law through legislative decree (and not specifically discussed in the constitution), the SCC will have the authority to dissolve future parliaments using similar logic.

For Egypt’s transition to succeed, presidential power must be checked by a strong, independent legislature. This is unlikely to happen unless electoral laws and procedures encourage inclusivity and equity. Indeed, coming parliamentary elections – and negotiations over the electoral law – will be the first test of the constitution’s durability. For political parties and candidates to have enough time to prepare, that process must begin now.

Daniel Tavana is a political analyst working on democratic governance and constitutional design in transitioning democracies— most recently with members of the Egyptian Constituent Assembly in Cairo. Previously, he served as the founding Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Journal of Middle Eastern Politics and Policy.  

 
عربي

Comments (2)

 
 
  • Darwish
    Thanks for summarizing the situation.

    I never understand the Supreme Court's insistence of refusing 100% proportional representation in the parliament. I mean, Germany is doing it, ain't it?

    The funny thing is, when the Court dissolved the parliament, it said that it does so because members of political parties competed in the seats reserved for independents. Meanwhile, in the United States, where the system is 100% independent, political parties compete in 100% of the parliament.

    The Egyptian's Supreme Court decision seems wicked to me.
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
  • trishjw
    USA has not always had free choice of its Senators or Representatives of both parts. More were allowed for the House of Representatives but until the middle of the 20th Century most senators were chosen and/or voted on by their respective state governments. Much of that also came after first all white males were able to vote not just those that owned property and then white women were allowed to vote in 1920 but most voters of color had no choice in the South and many other States until 1964. Hopefully, Egypt and those countries around it will not have to wait as long as we did to have free and fair elections. Some states are going backward with ID requirement for those without driver's licenses or other picture id. Yet they have been voting legally since they were 18 or 21 years old and most are now in their 60's. Hold strong make sure each of you over 18 no matter what your skin tone, religion or political preference happens to be that you can vote in each election. Set the rules for electoral voting after the Parliament in voted in and the SC keeps out of those results. That too should keep Mr. Morsi as president, not an Islamic form of a Brotherhood member that doesn't seem to exist any more--to everyone's benefit. So far I have liked what Mr Morsi has done and said to the US, EU and the rulers of most Middle Eastern countries. He appears to be his own man--and that's how it should be.
     
     
    Reply to this post

     
    Close Panel
Source: http://carnegieendowment.org/sada/2012/09/11/future-of-egypt-s-electoral-law/dt33
 

Stay Connected

Subscribe to Sada:
 
Subscription Options Sada is published in English and Arabic and available as articles are published or in a weekly digest.
Select Delivery
 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW Washington, DC 20036-2103 P: 202.483.7600 F: 202.483.1840
Carnegie Middle East Center Emir Bechir Street, Lazarieh Tower Bldg. No. 2026 1210, 5th flr. Downtown Beirut P.O.Box 11-1061 Riad El Solh Lebanon P: +961 1 99 12 91 F: +961 1 99 15 91