Parliamentary Elections in Post-Assad Syria

Crisis Group expert Nanar Hawach analyses Syria’s 5 October parliamentary elections – the first since the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024

By Nanar Hawach

Syria’s 5 October parliamentary elections were the first since the Assad regime’s fall. The elections filled more than half of the 210 seats in the “People’s Assembly”, which will shape legislation going forward. But while a major step, the process unfolded in an atmosphere of mistrust and insecurity, with some expressing doubts about whether the elections will serve as a bridge toward reconciliation and building a stable political order.

Holding elections in a post-conflict situation like in Syria, where nearly half of the population was displaced or fled the country, and where civil records are outdated and unreliable, was bound to involve massive challenges. The transitional authorities opted to surmount some of these by creating an indirect electoral system, organised by a presidentially-appointed Supreme Committee. Local sub-district committees selected a 6,000-member electoral college, which on 5 October elected 121 of the 140 assembly members from some 1,500 candidates, nominated from among the committees and approved by the Supreme Committee. The elections for 19 seats allocated to Hasakah and Raqqa provinces in the north east and Suweida province in the south, areas that are de facto outside Damascus’ control, were postponed, citing lack of security. 

One third of the seats (ie, 70) were left for President Ahmed al-Sharaa to appoint, a feature of the system that Syrian officials describe as a safeguard to ensure balance and inclusion. While a Presidential decree required that the electoral college be 20 per cent women, only three per cent of the elected MPs are women. 

Members of the Supreme Committee argue that the indirect voting system encouraged local communities to select respected figures with expertise. They compare the system favourably to sectarian power-sharing arrangements that have at times destabilised neighbouring countries like Lebanon and Iraq, and express hope that the election will create a technocratic assembly capable of managing the complex tasks of reconstruction and governance.

But critics see it differently, noting that the process was marred by opacity and allegations of manipulation. There were reports of widely respected nominees being purged from ballots and of the General Security (the state’s internal security service) imposing candidates on the process, plus allegations of forgery. Some opponents of the transitional government drew parallels to the previous regime’s electoral practices and expressed concern that the new parliament (a full one-third of whom Sharaa will hand-pick) will be an institutional façade for the concentration of power in the hands of a small group around the president. The postponement of polls in Druze and Kurdish areas also underscores the challenges Damascus is facing with possible state fragmentation and leaves those areas with no representation for the time being.

But it is too early to write off the new parliament. Once convened it will be up to the new legislators to show whether they can play a meaningful, independent role in shaping Syria’s new political order – and up to the transitional leadership in Damascus to give them the space to do so.