Syria is embarking on a significant political milestone by holding its first parliamentary elections since Bashar al-Assad was overthrown last December. However, the process is not without its challenges, as concerns about inclusivity and security have led to the postponement of voting in three provinces.
The upcoming elections for the People’s Assembly, which will shape legislation during a critical transitional period, will not follow a direct popular vote. Instead, representatives for two-thirds of the 210 seats will be chosen by “electoral colleges,” with the remaining third appointed directly by Interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa. This selection process, overseen by a committee appointed by the president himself, has raised concerns among civil society groups about the parliament’s potential lack of independence and genuine representation of the Syrian people’s will.
The elections have been delayed in the provinces of Raqqa, Hassakeh, and Suweida due to ongoing security concerns. These areas are grappling with the aftermath of sectarian violence and ongoing stand-offs, including areas controlled by Kurdish-led forces and regions that recently witnessed clashes between government forces and Druze militias. The postponed elections mean that approximately 20 seats will remain vacant, pending a resolution to the security and political situations in these provinces.
President al-Sharaa has acknowledged the difficulties of holding elections during a transitional phase, citing the displacement of a significant portion of the population and the loss of essential documentation. He has pledged to hold accountable all those responsible for violence, including those who committed atrocities under the previous regime, and assured that Syria is committed to establishing a new state with institutions and laws that protect the rights of all citizens.
Despite these assurances, critics have voiced skepticism. Representatives from Kurdish political parties have expressed concerns that the current electoral framework mirrors the authoritarian practices of the past, leading to exclusion and a denial of democratic rights. Residents also voice their unease, with some describing the process as more akin to an appointment than a genuine election, highlighting a lack of transparency regarding candidate lists and representation.