At a time when Syria remains deeply divided both politically and socially, and no national consensus has yet been reached on the country’s future, the Syrian Transitional Government announced this morning that it had set up ballot boxes for the appointment of parliament members by the election commission.

Although the transitional government is attempting to portray the elections as a step toward building its own legitimacy, they are facing harsh criticism for being legally and politically flawed.

Weak legal foundation undermines legitimacy

In areas controlled by the Syrian Transitional Government, so-called “parliamentary elections” are being held despite the absence of a comprehensive electoral law or criteria ensuring the representation of all segments of the population. Meanwhile, the system of large provincial elections continues instead of smaller district-level voting. At the same time, political party activities remain suspended, meaning that many parties may not be represented in parliament.

Without consulting national forces, the transitional government made unilateral amendments to the electoral law, such as limiting campaigns to one week and granting the High Committee authority to disqualify candidates on security grounds.

Observers describe Ahmed Al-Sharaa (Al-Jolani)’s approval of the temporary electoral regulations as an attempt to embellish the image of the current government, even though the country remains mired in political, social, and economic turmoil. Under such conditions, these elections are seen as devoid of substance and far from democratic.

The temporary electoral system grants greater executive power to Al-Jolani by allowing him to appoint one-third of parliament members without elections. It also focuses on establishing branch-level electoral committees, effectively turning the so-called “People’s Assembly” into a reflection of his own authority and altering its appearance. At the same time, this process increases his control over the legislative body.

Many Syrian opposition parties have condemned these changes as a repetition of authoritarian methods, stating that laws written unilaterally cannot create legitimacy and instead establish the dominance of a single party at the expense of the rest of the Syrian people. In this context, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) declared that no election held without a broad social coalition can be considered legitimate or representative of the Syrian people. The government also prevents independent prosecutors, the United Nations, and international organizations such as the European Union from monitoring the elections. The United Nations has repeatedly called for Syrian elections to be conducted within a general political framework, under international supervision, and with the participation of all Syrians.

Despite severe demographic and logistical challenges, the displacement of millions of people, and widespread lack of identity documents, the High Committee has introduced an indirect voting mechanism. This mechanism relies on electoral boards appointed by the transitional government without consultation, further undermining the credibility of the process.

Elections without a political foundation

The so-called People’s Assembly elections exclude the Democratic Autonomous Administration regions and most political and civil movements representing the majority of Syrians. The Autonomous Administration described the elections as a “one-sided theatre,” stated that any electoral process that fails to include all ethnic and political components is doomed to fail.

The Syrian people reacted within days, saying the elections represent an authoritarian move by the transitional government. At the same time, the Islamic High Security Commission in Syria and the diaspora rejected the elections, declaring them illegitimate and unrepresentative of the will of the Syrian people.

The country remains divided due to the policies of the central government in Damascus. There are no elections in North and East Syria or in Sweida (Suwayda). Many regions remain under occupation by the Turkish state and its mercenary factions, where only symbolic elections are expected to take place. Reports have also emerged claiming that some individuals paid up to 200,000 dollars to secure seats in the so-called People’s Assembly.

As a result, the elections will remain limited in scope, meaning they will not be held across Syria as a whole. According to many observers, “it is impossible for these elections to represent the Syrian people when half of the population is excluded from the political process.”

Observed effects

The newly elected “parliament” will not be recognized by all national forces, which will in turn deepen divisions and block the path toward reconciliation and a comprehensive national solution. Many political actors are expected to be ignored or excluded from the process. This situation contradicts the transitional government’s claims that it intends to hold talks with Syrian forces, particularly with representatives from North and East Syria and Sweida.

At the same time, it is highly likely that these elections will not be recognized by either the European Union or the United Nations, a development that will further weaken the transitional government’s position in any future negotiations.