Nine years ago, millions of Egyptians stood before the polling stations to participate in the first parliamentary elections after the revolution of January 25, 2011, and with all the competing candidates, voters participated in voting for freedom and betting on the spectrum of nascent democracy.

However, one of them did not expect that the coming years would carry with them the birth of a system that would make them reluctant to just follow up on any electoral event.

The elements of comparison seem to be stuttering between the parliamentary elections that took place in the atmosphere of the revolution on November 28, 2011, and those currently being held in the atmosphere of the run-off, in terms of the levels of participation rates, integrity and the representation of candidates for societal spectrums.

As much as the difference between the revolution elections and what is taking place under the umbrella of the military coup led by the current President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi on July 3, 2013 when he was Minister of Defense, there is a great similarity between the current election environment and those that were held in 2010 during the rule of ousted President Hosni Mubarak. Which was one of the main reasons for the outbreak of the Egyptians revolution.

Integrity and corruption

For many decades, the Egyptian voter remained the least weighty party in the electoral equation, whether parliamentary or presidential, which made him either reluctant to participate in the polls, were skeptical of the results, or were satisfied - according to observers - with electoral bribes out of a reality that could not be changed.

Part of that reality can be revealed through a statement issued by the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies before the last parliamentary elections held during the Mubarak era in November 2010.

The statement emphasized that the unprecedented climate of intimidation created by the authorities within the media, and the escalating violent campaign to restrict the right to peaceful assembly and political participation, is an indication of elections that lack international standards of integrity, and are based on legislative and constitutional corruption and administrative and security bullying, and indicates that the voters' will is falsified. It started early.

There was no clearer evidence of the validity of what the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies stated, about electoral transgressions, from the ruling National Democratic Party’s acquisition of 94% of the seats in Parliament at the time.

Social media leaders traded an image of a financial currency stamped with the number and symbol of an electoral candidate

Turnout, freedom and competition

However, the Egyptian revolution, which broke out a few days after the first session of the National Democratic Party Parliament was held, restored to the voter his confidence in his electoral voice and his enthusiasm for his role in building his future.

So for the first time, rows of tens of meters long appeared waiting to participate in the polling process that was held in late 2011 to elect a real parliament.

The revolution elections were characterized by an atmosphere of freedom and real competition between the various political parties and forces, and ended with the victory of the parties with an Islamic ideology by more than 65% of the votes.

In a completely opposite atmosphere, the current parliamentary elections are taking place where there is no diversity in the competing political forces, and everyone supports the current authority, as well as the return of electoral bribery scenes and the blackening of ballot papers.

In light of the dead state of the human rights movement after the systematic campaigns to kill and arrest its members by the authority, there was no serious civilian monitoring of the current elections, but those who exposed the violations were the candidates themselves.

Medhat al-Sharif, a member of Parliament and a candidate in the current elections, confirmed that the phenomenon of political money is spreading widely in electoral districts and represents a major crisis that may lead Egypt to the abyss.

And he went on to press statements, "Buying votes leads to the arrival of corrupt people and stakeholders to Parliament, and I saw the effect of this in the previous session during the discussion of the investment law with the emergence of pressure from interest groups to keep certain matters in the legislation, and their success leads to citizens losing their confidence in state institutions. And pushes them to refrain from elections. "

The media and social media circulated many photos and video clips of candidates and their representatives distributing electoral bribes, whether money or food commodities, as well as complaints of blackouting election cards in favor of specific lists, and the expulsion of candidates' representatives from the polling stations.

Play around and ignore

And things do not stop at the point of bribes and blackouts, as it extends to who the candidates are.

For example, the results of the first phase of the elections showed the victory of the "Guardians of the Nation" party, Ahmed Abdel Salam Qoura, who was the owner of one of the most famous corruption cases in recent years.

Qurah was involved in seizing 26,000 feddans in the Al-Ayyat area in Giza, by purchasing the feddan for only 200 pounds for the purpose of reclamation and agriculture, but he sold it at exorbitant prices for use in urban activity in violation of the law.

Although it was decided in April 2013 to prevent him from traveling and put him on the arrival watch lists, after the military coup he financed election campaigns for Sisi during the presidential elections, and he was able to join the "Homat Watan" party, and the fate of the corruption issue remained unknown.

The authority’s supervision of election corruption is also evident through the variation in the results of the vote counting minutes and the number of votes collected from the sub-committees.

The candidate of the Egyptian Democratic Party in Giza Governorate, Mohamed Fouad, emphasized that the voter numbers had been manipulated in favor of the candidates of the “Future of the Nation” party, supported by the authority, and the Republican People.

Fouad explained, through a statement posted on his Facebook account, that the official statements say that those who were elected in the Omraniyya and Talbieh areas during the election days were about 55,000 voters, but the result announced by the Central General Committee says that I got 64,000 votes.

There is also another aspect of corruption in the current elections, which is that those who wish to run for party lists pay money in exchange for this, especially the "Nation's Future" party, which won the parliamentary majority in the 2015 elections, and is considered by many to be the new alternative to the "dissolved" National Party.

The pioneers of the communication sites circulated accusations that the parties obtained millions of pounds from those wishing to run for their lists. Those accusations were confirmed by the statement issued by the candidate for the "Future of a Nation" party, Tariq Mukhaimer, after losing the election race, where he demanded that the party return the money it paid to him Postponing entry to Parliament, estimated at 8 million pounds.

However, the party issued a statement confirming that it received the aforementioned amount as part of the donation and at the request of the candidate.

In the same accusation chamber, lawyer Mortada Mansour, president of Zamalek club, who lost the election race in Dakahlia governorate, attacked his rival belonging to the "Future of the Nation" party, saying, "I did not pay 50 million pounds of people's blood to put me on the list."

He asked, during his meeting with the people of his electoral district, "Whoever pays 50 million pounds stays with him? How much does he have? And he takes this money from where, and how can he help them?"

Despite all of this, the National Elections Commission ignored all manifestations of corruption in the electoral process, and even announced that it had received 248 grievances during the first stage of polling, and looked into all of them, and some of them ended up not accepting them in form and others because they rejected them as a matter.

Participation .. Reluctance

Participation rates in elections are considered the most reliable indicator of voter confidence in the entire voting process. Therefore, it was natural for the turnout to participate in the post-revolution elections to be the highest in the history of Egypt.

In December 2011, the head of the Supreme Judicial Committee for Elections announced that the turnout had reached 62% in the first phase of the elections.

While the turnout in the first round of the current elections did not exceed 28% of the total eligible to vote.

As for the turnout, it did not exceed 14% during the election of the Senate (the second chamber of parliament), which was canceled after the revolution and then returned under a new law, which was held last August.

Huge differences

For his part, former parliamentarian Dr. Izz al-Din al-Kumi saw enormous differences between the elections that took place in the atmosphere of the revolution and those that took place during the era of Sisi.

Al-Kumi explained to Al-Jazeera Net that Al-Faisal, as he put it, is to win the current elections for money, electoral bribes and tie-ups with the security authorities that oversaw the selection of candidates.

And in the face of the corruption that gnaws the citizens' noses, the voters boycotted the voting process, according to Al-Koumi, who said, "Those who went to vote from the poor and needy would seek food supplies or a sum of money from the candidates."

The former parliamentarian recalled the atmosphere of the revolution elections, pointing to the integrity it exhibited in light of complete judicial control and the confidence of the voter in a parliament that exercises its oversight role and legislates laws that curb corruption.

He concluded by stressing that the new parliament will be similar to the 2010 parliament that preceded the revolution.

On the contrary, a member of the National Council for Women, Dr. Rania, saw the current elections as an example of the political movement that is characterized by transparency and integrity.

In press statements, she said that she did not notice any reluctance on the part of citizens to participate in the voting process, despite what was evidenced by the low participation rates, stressing that Egyptians were encouraged to vote in an atmosphere that they had lacked in previous eras, she said.