The illusion of legitimacy: unveiling Syria’s sham elections

Parliamentary elections are a travesty, and Syrians know it. But the vote plays an important legitimizing role for the Assad regime.

Expert comment Published 16 July 2024 3 minute READ

Dr Haid Haid

Consulting Fellow, Middle East and North Africa Programme

The Syrian regime held its parliamentary elections on 15 July, marking the fourth such event since the start of the country’s civil war in 2011. Despite the ongoing war, massive displacement, unresolved armed conflict, a deteriorating economy and a divided nation, President Bashar al-Assad remains unwavering in his rejection of any political transition.

Instead, Assad has turned elections into bureaucratic rituals with predetermined outcomes, using them to reward loyalists and reshuffle patronage networks.

As a result, many Syrians and analysts viewed these elections as inconsequential, dismissing them as rubber stamps lacking transparency and fairness.

Yet the Assad regime wants the participation of ordinary Syrians. Regular elections and parliamentary process help create an illusion of legal and popular legitimacy and project an image of strength and stability, both internally and externally.

The constitution

Elections portray Assad’s regime as firmly in control, even if not genuinely democratic. Moreover, holding elections on time signals to external actors, particularly rivals, that the regime is resilient and will not succumb to pressure or allow interference in Syria’s domestic affairs. Elections also serve to justify the normalization of relations with the regime by other countries in the region.

Syria’s Parliament (or ‘People’s Assembly’) is a rubber-stamp body without the power to initiate or shape legislation. But it remains crucial for Assad to legalize and legitimize his policies and actions.

Assad requires the People’s Assembly to amend the constitution so he can run again in 2028.

The regime has used Parliament to tighten its control over state institutions and legalize its human rights violations. More importantly, the primary task of the upcoming People’s Assembly will likely be to amend the constitution to legitimize the continuation of Assad’s rule.

Assad requires the Assembly to amend the constitution so he can run again in 2028. That would mirror what happened in 2000 when the Assembly lowered the candidacy age from forty to thirty-four years, enabling Assad to run for the presidency. While these amendments are merely ‘window dressing,’ Assad wants to ensure the process appears proper and legal.

Patronage

Parliamentary elections also enable the regime to adjust its patronage networks by rewarding loyalists and punishing dissenters. New businessmen, tribal figures and militia leaders have been integrated into each successive Parliament since the beginning of the civil war, while others are banned from running again.

There are no fixed criteria for the number of Parliament members allocated from each governorate…allowing the regime to over-represent its strongholds.

In June, the Baath Party punished 19 members currently serving as MPs from various Syrian provinces, barring them from running in the next session due to ‘their failure to comply with leadership instructions’. 

Conversely, Mohammad Hamsho, a prominent pro-regime businessman previously barred from running in the last elections, was allowed to run this time.

Notably, there are no fixed criteria for the number of Parliament members allocated from each governorate. This is decided at the president’s discretion, rather than based on population size, allowing the regime to over-represent its strongholds in Parliament and adjust proportions to fit the list of individuals being rewarded or punished.

For example, the regime stronghold of Latakia has seven more seats allocated to it than Daraa, a region strongly associated with the opposition, even though the two governorates have roughly the same population size. 

Through manipulating Parliament in this manner, the regime has been able to foster competition among loyalists behind closed doors, boosting their support for Assad while side-lining underperformers.

Historically, Syrian elections have been rigged, and this was no exception. To prevent any surprises, the authorities have maintained decades-long regulations that effectively allocate two-thirds of the seats to the Baath Party and the allied parties of the National Progressive Front. 

According to the lists issued by the Baath Party, 16 seats are reserved for the allied parties, while around 65 are designated for ‘independents,’ typically dominated by loyalists, including businessmen and cronies. This ensures that Assad’s Baath Party secures a majority and maintains influence over the legislative process, even if it serves only a nominal function.

Given the regime’s intention of using elections to legitimize its rule, observers should not expect them to deliver any substantial change.

However, the regime’s attempt to validate these elections does not go unchallenged. The elections were extensively boycotted in non-regime territories. Pockets of resistance to the election in regime-controlled areas like Sweida and portions of Daraa, coupled with the disenfranchisement of over 6 million Syrians living abroad, cast serious doubts on the credibility of the outcome.

Western countries such as the UK and Germany have condemned the elections, contending that they fall short of fundamental international norms, exacerbate ongoing conflict, and defy UN Resolution 2254 which called for urgent negotiations between the regime and opposition to deliver a political transition in Syria.

Given the regime’s intention of using elections to legitimize its rule, observers should not expect them to deliver any substantial change. They remain primarily a tool by which Assad exercises control and demonstrates legitimacy. 

So long as Assad maintains internal support from his patronage network and external backing by countries like Iran and Russia, his ability to dictate the terms of elections looks unassailable.

Genuine transformation will only be possible when Syria transitions to credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance, as articulated by UN Resolution 2254. For now, genuine democracy remains very far off.