Syria recently held its first parliamentary elections since the end of the devastating civil war, a decade after rebels, led by current President Ahmed al-Shara, overthrew Bashar al-Assad.
The process is notable as citizens did not directly elect their representatives; instead, President al-Shara personally appointed one-third of the 210 lawmakers. Despite this indirect approach, some Syrians view these elections as a significant move forward after more than five decades under the Assad family’s authoritarian rule.
However, critics voice skepticism, suggesting the vote is not truly representative and is merely a maneuver by Mr. al-Shara to cement his power.
Key areas of the country, not fully under central government control, were excluded from the elections. This includes regions of Raqqa and Hasakah Provinces, governed by a Kurdish-led administration, and the entire southern province of Sweida, which saw deadly clashes between Bedouin tribes and the Druze religious minority just last summer.
While the exact powers of this new Parliament remain to be seen, for a nation emerging from such a prolonged period of dictatorship and conflict, these elections could mark a crucial moment on the path toward a more democratic system.
Here’s a closer look at the electoral process:
How the Election Unfolded
Direct voting was not implemented due to significant administrative challenges following the civil war, such as a lack of proper identification for many citizens and widespread displacement.
President al-Shara’s administration established an electoral committee, which then appointed regional bodies responsible for selecting members of local electoral councils. These local councils, in turn, vetted the parliamentary candidates.
On election day, approximately 7,000 members of these electoral colleges gathered in auditoriums nationwide to cast their ballots, according to electoral officials.
The atmosphere in Damascus was one of cautious optimism. Academics, politicians, and teachers carefully selected their preferred candidates after surrendering their mobile phones before entering the voting booths.
Hani Meniawi, a 74-year-old neurosurgeon and member of the electoral college, expressed his enthusiasm after voting at a central library in Damascus: “It is magnificent. I am 74 years old and it is the first time I am free to elect somebody whom I know and trust.”
The individuals chosen by these electoral college members will form two-thirds of the new Parliament, while the President will directly appoint the remaining 70 lawmakers.
Election results are anticipated to be announced on Monday.
Who Was Eligible to Run?
Given the complex history of dictatorship and civil war, the electoral committee imposed strict eligibility criteria for parliamentary candidates. Exclusions included anyone associated with or supportive of the former Assad regime (unless they had previously resigned or defected), individuals with criminal records, those under 25, anyone involved in terrorist organizations, or anyone advocating separatism, partition, or foreign intervention.
Additionally, individuals who did not possess Syrian citizenship before 2011—the year the civil war began—were barred from running. This measure likely aimed to exclude foreign fighters, many from Iran-backed militias, who were granted citizenship by the al-Assad government.
Is This a Real Move Towards Democracy?
Some observers remain unconvinced.
The Kurdish autonomous government in northeastern Syria has sharply criticized the elections, calling them “an attempt to reproduce the exclusionary policies that have governed Syria for decades.” They argue the vote is unrepresentative, sidelines many communities, and have urged the international community to withhold recognition of the results.
Negotiations between the Kurdish leadership and Mr. al-Shara’s government to integrate military and civilian operations have recently stalled.
Samy Akil, a nonresident fellow at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, pointed out the rushed nature of the vote and questioned the Parliament’s potential for independent authority in lawmaking or as a check on al-Shara’s executive power.
Mr. Akil also noted concerns that the interim government has already failed to adhere to new legal provisions from the interim Constitution enacted in March, such as seeking parliamentary approval for certain decisions.
“It’s a process of rubber-stamping and projecting legitimacy, at least internally,” Mr. Akil stated.
He further suggested that President al-Shara might use the appointment process to reward politically important loyalists.
Despite these reservations, others argue the election signifies progress.
Civil society groups involved in training the electoral colleges have defended the process as the most feasible option under current circumstances.
“Of course, we would all hope for open elections,” said Abdullah El-Hafi, director of the Local Administration Councils Unit, a governance advocacy group.
However, he emphasized that Syria currently lacks essential infrastructure for open elections, such as unified civil registries or established voting laws.
Mr. El-Hafi cited similar electoral models used successfully, albeit partially, in other countries undergoing political transitions.
“It is not the ideal situation, but it is the situation that is possible now,” he concluded.
Sumaya Hilal, a pharmacist from Damascus and a member of the electoral council, shared her excitement, calling it momentous for recently displaced Syrians like herself to be present in the Parliament building.
“Here we are, on the verge of laying the first foundation for building a state of law,” she remarked. “We dreamed of voting for whomever we wanted. It is a great responsibility, and our consolation is that the Syrians are determined to succeed.”
Syria’s Broader Political Transition
In March, Mr. al-Shara unveiled a caretaker government, assigning key ministries like defense, foreign affairs, and interior to close allies. This interim government is slated to govern until full elections can be organized, a process al-Shara has indicated could span up to four years.
While the interim government aims to depart from the brutal legacy of the Assad family, concerns persist regarding al-Shara’s governing style, which critics argue still retains authoritarian tendencies.
The interim constitution, announced in March, preserved a strong presidential system, granting extensive executive power to Mr. al-Shara, including the authority to appoint Supreme Court judges and one-third of Parliament members.
Although al-Shara’s government includes a few ministers from minority groups and one woman, his primary reliance remains on a tight-knit circle of loyalists from his time leading the Islamist rebel group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.
This limited representation and the concentration of power among his loyalists have fueled distrust among various religious and ethnic minority communities, including Kurds, Christians, Alawites, and Druze.