Voting process seemed fair, but political climate was not, say election observers

Voting conduct in the presidential election was good, or very good, across the three days that polls were open, the European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) chief observer Mario David said in a press conference on Thursday.

Turnout was higher than previously thought, reaching 47.3 percent according to Presidential Election Commission (PEC) numbers, David continued.

However, despite these positive indicators, David questioned the political atmosphere leading up to the election, saying there were concerns regarding freedom of expression and the exclusion of different stakeholders from the political process.

Chief among those concerns were mass death sentences levied against hundreds of defendants allegedly affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the arrests of political activists, excessive use of violence on the part of security forces, and the imprisonment of journalists from Al Jazeera, leading to a “climate of fear for journalists.”

“The presidential election was administered in line with the law, in an environment falling short of constitutional principles,” the mission said.

As for PEC’s controversial last-minute decision to extend voting into a third day, the EU EOM said the move wasn’t against the law, but caused “unnecessary uncertainty” in the process.

Furthermore, there wasn’t a level playing field for all presidential candidates, the mission claimed. Campaign finances were not properly regulated, and private media outlets devoted twice as much time to Field Marshal Abdel Fattah al-Sisi than his rival Hamdeen Sabbahi in their election coverage, according to the EU EOM.

EU parliament representative Robert Goebbels said that was an urgent need to reach out to those who did not participate in the electoral process, and also expressed concern about the political climate and media coverage.

High turnout is not an indication of a democratic process, Goebbels pointed out, citing high turnout in North Korea’s elections.

The electoral process can be "democratic, peaceful, but not necessarily always fair,” he cautioned.

The US-based Democracy International (DI) had a much more critical take on the past three days.

“Egypt’s repressive political environment made a genuinely democratic presidential election impossible,” claimed DI’s head, Eric Bjornlund, in an official press statement on Thursday.

“Democratic progress cannot be achieved at the expense of human rights. The Egyptian government should take immediate action to open political space and put an end to the political exclusion and intimidation that have characterized this process,” he said.

DI’s report focused on the “oppressive” atmosphere surrounding the campaigning period, echoing the EU EOM’s findings, and also highlighting the detrimental effects of the contentious Protest Law on freedom of assembly and speech.

Furthermore, media coverage “strongly favored Abdel Fattah al-Sisi,” DI said, again concurring with EU EOM.

“Both state and private media engaged in a relentless campaign to bolster turnout in favor of Sisi, often equating abstention with treason and stigmatizing those with opinions differing from the state narrative. This prevented open discussion and debate about the election,” the statement said.

DI had been the first group to slam PEC’s decision to extend the voting period, saying the decision was not justifiable.

“DI observers across the country reported no impediments to voting during the first two days of balloting that would necessitate an additional day,” the report read. “Last-minute decisions about important election procedures, such as a decision to extend polling by an additional day, should be made only in extraordinary circumstances.”