Syria's New Parliament: A Democratic Facade?
Translated from German, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- Syria has established a new parliament following the fall of the Assad regime, but it falls short of democratic ideals.
- A significant portion of parliamentary members were appointed rather than elected, undermining popular representation.
- The article critiques the function of parliaments in many Arab nations, suggesting they often serve to consolidate autocratic power rather than facilitate democracy.
Syria has officially inaugurated a new parliament, a move presented as a step towards a new political order after the downfall of the Assad regime. However, the composition and function of this legislative body raise serious questions about its commitment to democratic principles.
The most important task of the parliament consists of rubber-stamping the laws, budgets, and decrees dictated by President Abdelfatah al-Sisi and his entourage without resistance.
Out of the total parliamentary members, only two-thirds were elected, and even then, the election process involved a select group of approximately 7,000 electors, not a direct popular vote. The remaining third of the seats were filled by appointments made directly by the new Syrian President, Ahmed al-Sharaa. This significant proportion of appointed members means that the president faces little genuine opposition within the parliament, allowing him to maintain the facade of a democratic system while consolidating his authority.
The article draws a parallel between Syria's situation and the broader trend observed across many Arab nations. In countries ranging from Morocco to Oman, and from Iraq to Sudan, parliaments often function not as platforms for popular will, but as instruments to bolster the power of autocratic rulers. Examples cited include Egypt, where the parliament largely approves presidential decrees without challenge, and Algeria, where the legislature serves the interests of a hidden network of power.
The deputies in Damascus were not directly elected by the people. A third was appointed by Ahmed al-Sharaa himself.
Libya presents a different, yet equally undemocratic, scenario with two competing parliaments that primarily engage in mutual obstruction. The article concludes that despite undemocratic structures, unfair elections, and widespread vote manipulation, Arab autocrats place significant value on the existence of parliaments. This is often done to project an image of legitimacy, particularly to Western observers, while maintaining a firm grip on power behind the scenes.
Between Morocco and Oman, Iraq and Sudan, there are many parliaments that serve not the people, but another cause: securing the power of autocrats.
Originally published by Neue Zรผrcher Zeitung in German. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.