CIVICUS discusses Tunisia’s recent presidential election with Siwar Gmati of IWatch, a Tunisian civil society organisation (CSO) and CIVICUS Digital Democracy Initiative partner. IWatch focuses on fighting corruption and promoting transparency in Tunisia.

On 6 October, incumbent President Kais Saied was re-elected with close to 91 per cent of the vote, but on a very low turnout of 28.8 per cent. Several parties boycotted the election, saying it couldn’t be trusted to be free and fair. One prominent opposition figure was jailed and others were banned from standing, with the Saied-appointed electoral commission defying court orders to reinstate them.

Was the election anywhere close to free and fair?

If you focus on the technical or operational aspects of the election – such as people putting their ballots in the ballot box – then you wouldn’t say it was blatantly unfair. But if you look at the broader political atmosphere of the election and the events leading up to election day, you’ll realise it was far from free and fair. Over the past two years, political leaders and opponents have been imprisoned without due process or a fair trial. There have been significant civic space restrictions and a noticeable clampdown on free media and freedom of expression.

A free and fair election isn’t just about the act of voting. It’s about a democratic environment where political parties, CSOs, election observers and the media can operate freely without fear of intimidation and legal retaliation. It also requires a transparent and neutral election management body and a stable and consistent legal framework. Tunisia’s electoral environment lacked these essential components, making it impossible to describe the election as truly free and fair.

How did the government restrict civil society attempts to monitor the election?

The government imposed significant restrictions, including by denying accreditation to many CSOs that traditionally monitor elections, including iWatch and Mourakiboun. This election had the lowest number of election observers since Tunisia’s 2011 revolution. Several political leaders were imprisoned, and many candidates faced obstacles against competing. Even when the administrative court ruled in favour of the reinstatement of three candidates, the electoral body ignored these rulings. The electoral law was changed just a week before the vote, altering the jurisdiction of the administrative court over electoral disputes, which only complicated the electoral climate.

In the months leading to the election, the crackdown intensified. There was an online smear campaign against civil society, with President Saied calling activists foreign spies and traitors with an external agenda. Despite these challenges, some CSOS managed to gain accreditation, but their work focused mainly on sharing statistics rather than flagging violations in electoral management.

Despite the pressure, civil society found ways to organise and monitor the election. Our organisation was denied accreditation, but we continued to monitor the process from afar and issued statements on the irregularities we observed. Democratic forces formed networks, such as the Tunisian Network for Rights and Freedom, which brought together 14 leading CSOs and nine political parties to organise protests and flashmobs against the crackdown on rights and freedoms. Feminist groups launched campaigns such as Feminist Dynamic to call for the release of women political prisoners and civil society activists arrested in the last two years.

Why was turnout so low?

The low turnout was mainly due to the lack of political representation. Major parties such as the Destourian and Ennahdha parties didn’t field candidates because their leaders are in prison. Political choice was limited to three candidates: Saied, a supporter of Saied and a third candidate who was on the ballot but is in prison. So most people saw no point in voting. Young voters, who in previous elections had engaged with different candidates through vivid electoral campaigns and taken part in lively debates, stayed away – only six per cent turned out to vote.

It wouldn’t be accurate to say, however, that the election was entirely illegitimate, as some 2.5 million Tunisians voted for Saied. But with the vast majority of the nine million eligible voters staying away, it’s clear the results are not truly representative. Most voters expressed their dissatisfaction with Tunisia’s current direction by not voting.

What future scenarios do you see in the light of the election results?

Right now, just a few days after the results, the focus seems to be on calming things down. But it’s a different story on the ground. Several CSOs, including mine, have had their funds frozen and many are under investigation. Activists have been arrested and there were clashes between police and pro-Palestine protesters shortly after the election.

We expect further restrictions on civil society and dictatorial measures in the future. It’s highly likely that the law governing CSOs will be changed and foreign funding restricted.

In terms of restoring Tunisia’s democratic institutions, there aren’t many options left. Our role as civil society is to resist and persevere in the fight for democracy. We must protect human rights defenders and activists and keep up the pressure. Whether through protest or simply by continuing our work, we will resist and continue to hope for political change to happen. For civil society, the struggle has become existential.