The president of Egypt does not leave by the electoral process

In the Arab world, not least Egypt, the president never leaves office by the electoral process stipulated in the constitution, which is subject to amendment according to the vision of the regime, as happened in 2019 in the so-called “mother of the world”. Elections are seen as a formality for renewing the ruler’s term in office and managing the political scene from the seat of power. Only the 2012 presidential election in Egypt, which took place in the wake of the 25 January revolution, broke the mould, but the result was overturned by exploiting the political conflict between the revolutionary forces, resulting in a military coup.

The three days of voting in the Egyptian election passed according to expectations, with Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi “elected” for another term. The constitutional oath of office has become more of a political ritual than a commitment for the postholder to be held accountable. Al-Sisi took the oath amid praise from the heads of the House of Representatives and the Senate and the official media, with an emphasis on the high voter turnout and the people’s representatives’ pledge of allegiance to the president’s policies.

Anyone observer would have noticed that the state institutions were behind every decision, starting from the early electoral procedures and ending with the predictable result announced by the National Elections Authority. What a wonderful democratic scenario! It was all stage-managed from the beginning, of course, with unwelcome candidates excluded from the tightly-controlled process. Nevertheless, the state was keen to present this election as slightly different from the 2014 and 2018 versions, starting with the number of candidates and their platforms, and ending with a fake picture of the masses exercising their right to vote, despite the economic hardships they are experiencing.

As is usual in Third World countries, all state institutions backed the incumbent, who is always re-elected.

In Egypt, there is no such thing as a former president living in retirement. These institutions played their role to perfection, managing every stage of the process, from candidate selection to propaganda, voting, counting and announcing the result. Independent media outlets were threatened with referral to the Public Prosecutor, which is what happened with the websites Mada Masr and Sahih Masr among others.

READ: Egypt rejects deployment of joint forces with Israel on Gaza border

The state used well-tried tactics in the election, including transporting voters to polling stations, whether they wanted to go or not, all monitored on social media. State employees were forced to vote and were punished if they did not follow instructions. Private sector companies were forced to mobilise their workers as well. University students were threatened with losing their yearly grade if they did not vote. Poor people were bribed with money and food to get them to vote for the “right” candidate. Citizens in some places were even stopped in the street and taken to vote in expatriate committees, which seemed to be a way to interfere in the electoral process.

State agencies also tried to block plans for a boycott of the election by insisting beforehand that the result is not “predetermined” and calling on Egyptians to exercise their political rights by voting, at home and abroad. Patriotic songs and propaganda advertisements were produced to encourage voters.

Some pro-regime organisations sought to highlight the votes of their members and publish pictures of them on news sites, almost as if they had been instructed to do so. Citizens were threatened with a fine if they did not go to vote. While loyalist parties used hundreds of buses to transport people to the polling stations, delegates for candidate Farid Zahran were prevented from attending the vote counts, despite the presence of the other candidates’ delegates.

It is clear, therefore, that the state used all of the administrative and security tools at its disposal to get the desired result; it had apparently unlimited financial capabilities to do this, thanks to businessmen and the state coffers. Even so, it did not convince everyone of even the minimum of credibility for the electoral process. A large segment of the population remains convinced that this was all an elaborate charade with a pre-determined “victory” for Al-Sisi.

Citizens’ interest was focused on guessing the ranking of the other three candidates — Farid Zahran, Abdel-Sanad Yamama and Hazem Omar — to see who would be the runner-up in this fake election. Is it credible to believe that Al-Sisi enjoyed a landslide victory despite the crippling economic crisis in Egypt; the regime’s inability to do anything to stop the slaughter in Gaza; and its failure to deal with the Ethiopian Grand Renaissance Dam project and its effect on the River Nile?

What happened cannot be described as a genuine election; it was faked from a to z by the state to ensure that the president would be pleased, while presenting a positive image of Egyptian “democracy” to the world. Sources at the National Elections Authority said that voter turnout was just 45 per cent, and the free participation of those who did vote cannot be taken for granted. It is clear, therefore, that the legitimacy of the result has to be in doubt, as does that of the strategic decisions that the regime takes in the near future. 

READ: Gaza war ‘grave threat’ to Egypt national security, Sisi says after re-election as president

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.