• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUUkraine
  • Donate
Opaque and Messy Elections

Source: Getty

Article

Opaque and Messy Elections

The lack of transparency and the presence of widespread irregularities in the voting and counting process have given Egypt’s parliamentary elections little credibility among both international and domestic observers.

Link Copied
By Michele Dunne
Published on Nov 30, 2010

As results come in for Egypt’s People’s Assembly elections—surprise, a victory for the ruling National Democratic Party (NDP)—they are likely to enjoy little credibility either inside or outside the country due to the total lack of transparency and the widespread irregularities and violence that characterized the voting and counting processes. 

Extensive restrictions on media coverage and civil society monitoring ensured that there would be little transparency on election day. Egyptian authorities prevented live satellite broadcasts from the country and cancelled planned television programs by major media outlets, including the BBC.

After rebuffing the requests of international organizations to observe the elections on the excuse that there would be an extensive domestic monitoring effort, Egyptian authorities impeded the work of local civil society monitors. Only a small percentage were granted official credentials, and then most of those credentialed were either denied entry to polling and counting stations or evicted after they entered. (Similarly, representatives of opposition candidates were excluded from polling stations in many locations even if they had official credentials, while representatives of ruling party candidates were admitted.)

While the Higher Electoral Commission, which was charged with supervising the parliamentary elections, responded to early complaints about monitor exclusion by saying it would look into the problem, the commission itself created the problem by issuing overly restrictive regulations for monitoring—stipulating, for example, that credentialed monitors could enter polling stations only with the permission of the polling station chair, as if the credentials did not in themselves constitute permission.

Although monitors mostly watched the elections from outside polling places, they observed signs of widespread electoral fraud, in particular ballot box stuffing. Monitors witnessed or received eyewitness accounts (as well as video evidence) of voting stations being closed for hours while poll workers wrote out ballot after ballot, and of supporters of ruling party candidates arriving at voting stations bearing large plastic bags full of voter cards or completed ballots. Outside the polling places, vote buying proceeded as usual, with the price for a vote varying according to the location and the time of day.

Coercion and intimidation also featured in the Egyptian elections, primarily perpetrated by “baltagiyya,” thugs hired either by the security services or by individual candidates. Thugs kept voters out of certain polling stations for hours at a time, expelled civil society monitors and journalists by force, and intimidated or beat up campaign workers or thugs working for other candidates. A few of the thugs reportedly worked for Muslim Brotherhood candidates, but the vast majority appeared to be affiliated with the regime or the National Democratic Party and were tolerated by uniformed security.

With the baltagiyya on hand to do the dirty work, uniformed security officers appeared to be better behaved than in previous elections and there were fewer reports of security cordons around polling places in order to exclude or intimidate voters.

Among the little-noticed surprises of the elections was an announcement that Coptic Pope Shenouda had voted for an opposition candidate, Rami Lakah (a Copt) of the Wafd Party. This was in stark contrast to the Pope’s stance during the 2005 elections, when he instructed Copts that it was their duty to vote for the ruling National Democratic Party and went so far as to excommunicate several Copts who chose to run as opposition candidates. While Shenouda’s change of heart will not affect the election results, it is a strong sign of his displeasure with the regime’s handling of simmering sectarian tensions, including an incident the week before elections in which security services provoked unrest by disrupting the construction of a church, resulting in the killing of one young Coptic man.

Sectarian conflicts are among several other issues—economic dissatisfaction, police brutality and torture, and public safety problems—souring the attitude of Egyptians toward the government and keeping the internal situation at a simmer, if not a boil. A parliamentary election seen by Egyptians as having been stolen will turn the temperature up another notch.
 

About the Author

Michele Dunne

Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program

Michele Dunne was a nonresident scholar in Carnegie’s Middle East Program, where her research focuses on political and economic change in Arab countries, particularly Egypt, as well as U.S. policy in the Middle East.

    Recent Work

  • Research
    Islamic Institutions in Arab States: Mapping the Dynamics of Control, Co-option, and Contention
      • +6

      Yasmine Farouk, Nathan J. Brown, Maysaa Shuja Al-Deen, …

  • Research
    From Hardware to Holism: Rebalancing America’s Security Engagement With Arab States
      • +8

      Robert Springborg, Emile Hokayem, Becca Wasser, …

Michele Dunne
Former Nonresident Scholar, Middle East Program
Michele Dunne
North AfricaEgyptPolitical Reform

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    The EU Needs a Third Way in Iran

    European reactions to the war in Iran have lost sight of wider political dynamics. The EU must position itself for the next phase of the crisis without giving up on its principles.

      Richard Youngs

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Can Europe Still Matter in Syria?

    Europe’s interests in Syria extend beyond migration management, yet the EU trails behind other players in the country’s post-Assad reconstruction. To boost its influence in Damascus, the union must upgrade its commitment to ensuring regional stability.

      Bianka Speidl, Hanga Horváth-Sántha

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europolis, Where Europe Ends

    A prophetic Romanian novel about a town at the mouth of the Danube carries a warning: Europe decays when it stops looking outward. In a world of increasing insularity, the EU should heed its warning.

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: What Issue Is Europe Ignoring at Its Peril in 2026?

    2026 has started in crisis, as the actions of unpredictable leaders shape an increasingly volatile global environment. To shift from crisis response to strategic foresight, what under-the-radar issues should the EU prepare for in the coming year?

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Can Europe and Africa Mend Fences?

    Despite the strategic importance of relations between the EU and the African Union, deep divisions remain between the blocs. At their upcoming summit, both partners should strive to build a mutually beneficial cooperation.

      Marta Martinelli

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.