Credit: Al-Jazeera

Egypt held parliamentary elections last Sunday and not surprisingly President Hosni Mabarak’s ruling party won an overwhelming majority of the seats.  Also not surprisingly the election results were marred by multiple allegations of voter intimidation and violence.  Amnesty International has issued a release calling for the immediate investigation of violence in connection with the elections, and the Obama Administration expressed “disappointment” with “the numerous reported irregularities at the polls.” Human Rights Watch said it had received reports of “numerous” violations during the vote. These included authorities detaining journalists and preventing the staff of opposition candidates from entering 30 polling stations the group visited, it said in a statement distributed to reporters yesterday in Cairo.

The US media has given little attention to the role of gender in these elections.  (The New York Times tucked into its coverage of the election only a small nugget in a much larger article: “There was at least one new element in Sunday’s elections: 64 seats were added to the chamber and set aside for women, bringing the total number of lawmakers to 518.”)

But actually, gender was a very important part of these elections.  According to Foreign Policy Magazine “This was supposed to be Egypt’s pro-women election. In 2009, President Hosni Mubarak’s long-standing National Democratic Party government passed a law creating a new quota system, adding 64 seats to the People’s Assembly that can be contested only by women. The new quota, which will stay in place over two five-year election cycles, will ensure that women control at least 12 percent of the assembly. Announcing it, the regime proclaimed the end of a system that saw women holding only nine of the outgoing parliament’s 454 seats.”

This goal was marred by voter intimidation and fraud, mirroring problems with the elections overall.  Election monitors from the Egyptian Center for Women’s Rights were denied access to the polling places, after having secured governmental permission to do so.

Even in the absence of voter intimidation, the new quotas, while trumpeted as a great reform by the ruling party, are unlikely to deliver greater rights for women more generally.  According to Mozn Hassan (via Al-Jazeera), the executive director of the Nazra Centre for Feminist Studies in Cairo, while the quota looks good from the outside, it conceals a host of more complicated problems.  “The quota system has definitely increased the number of women, we cannot deny that, but we’re more concerned with the quality of candidates rather than the quantity,” she said, adding that entering a public parliamentary race does not inherently mean a woman is a good politician.  “I’m worried about the kind of women that will join parliament. Many of them are women who are against women,” she said.

“They do not have to be feminists; we want to see women who will fight for women’s rights.  The quota system is only put forth to send an image that Egypt is becoming more democratic, but in doing so it overlooks other problems.”

Tahani El-Gebaly, Egypt’s first female judge, is quoted in al-Shorouk expressing skepticism about the value of the quota  :

The quota could get us 64 women in the People’s Assembly, but they could very well be worthless; those women might just keep silent or join the applauding masses […] How can women play any role in a parliament that has no vision when it comes to critical issues like democracy or social matters that affect both men and women?

Not everyone is a skeptical as Hassan and El-Gebaly.  This short video produced for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review tells a more optimistic story about women in the Egyptian elections:

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has a good story on the gendered implications of the new quotas here, as does Al-Jazeera here, and the Economist here.


  1. New Blog Post: Gender in the Egyptian Elections – Old Wine in New Bottles or Something Better for Women? http://wp.me/ploC4-Nj

  2. I adore DecalGirl’s stuff, been using them for about 2 many years, due to the fact i acquired my OG droid. Bought their skins for that, my DX and my Xoom. Seeking one for my sons new 3DS. They really will be the best high quality available, and their service is brilliant!

  3. Without reading through all of these, I’m fine with it, but there
    should be an place to put your alias so persons can nevertheless know everything you used to publish beneath.

  4. With havin so much content do you ever run into any issues of plagorism or copyright violation? My website has
    a lot of exclusive content I’ve either written myself or
    outsourced but it looks like a lot of it is popping it up
    all over the web without my authorization. Do you know any methods to help
    prevent content from being ripped off? I’d genuinely appreciate

    Feel free to visit my web-site – Santiago Krikoryan

  5. I have been examinating out some of your articles and i can state clever stuff.
    I will surely bookmark your blog.

    My web site: Allie Giacopuzzi

Add a comment

Comments are subject to moderation and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of
Columbia Law School or Columbia University.



"Homeland" Security Abortion Rights Activism Adoption adultery Advocacy Affordable Care Act Alien Tort Claims Act Amicus Brief Asylum Bankruptcy BDS Bullying Census Politics Children Citizenship Civil Unions Clinic Columbia Law School Compulsory Marriage Condoms Contraception Contraception Mandate Cordoba House Criminal Law Cures for Homosexuality Defense of Marriage Act Disability Rights Discrimination Divorce Domestic Partnership Domestic Violence Domestic Workers Don't Ask Don't Tell Earth Day Economic Justice Education Egypt Elections Employment Discrimination ENDA Estate Planning Events Family Law Fellowships femininity Feminism Free Speech Gender and Technology Gender Identity Discrimination Gendering the Economy Gender Justice GSL Online Haiti Hate Crimes Health Care Hilary Clinton Hillary Clinton Hiring HIV HIV Discrimination Hobby Lobby Homelessness Homophobia Housing Human Rights Identity Politics Illegitimacy (sic) Immigration Reform In-ing Incest India International Law Intersectional Feminism Islamophobia Israel Jobs Justice Sotomayor King & Spalding Labor Trafficking Land Reform Law School Legal Profession Legal Scholarship Lesbian & Gay Parenting LGBT Parenting Marital Status Discrimination Marriage Marriage Equality Masculinity Medicaid Michelle Obama Migration Military National Security Obama Administration Obama Appointments Obergefell Outing OWS Palestine Parenting Pinkwashing Policing Politics of the Veil Polyamory Popular Culture Pornograpy Pregnancy Presidential Politics Prisons Privacy Products Liability Profanity Prop 8 Prosecutorial Discretion Publications Public Rights/Private Conscience Public Rights/Private Conscience Project Queer Theory Queer vs. Gay Rights Race and Racism Racial Stereotyping Rape Religion Religious Accommodation Religious Exemption Religious Exemptions Religious Freedom Restoration Act Religious Fundamentalism Reproductive Rights Reproductive Technology RFRA Romania Rwanda Sartorial Commentary Schools Sex Discrimination Sex Education Sex Stereotyping Sexting Sex Trafficking Sexual Assault Sexual Duplicity Sexual Harassment Sexual Health Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic Sexual Orientation Discrimination Sex Work Silencing of voices SMUG Sodomy Law Reform Solidarity Sports Supreme Court Surrogacy Technology Title IX Trafficking Transgender Uganda Uncategorized Violence Women and Poverty Women of Color Work Zimbabwe

Academic Calendar  |  Resources for Employers  |  Campus Map & Directory  |  Columbia University  |  Jobs at Columbia  |  Contact Us

© Copyright 2009, Columbia Law School. For questions or comments, please contact the webmaster.