Egypt’s protracted parliamentary elections, which ended in January 2026 after 99 days since November 2025, demonstrate that the country’s electoral system is undergoing significant institutional improvements in response to the challenges of modern governance.
Especially for ISGS.ru
Hamdi A. HassanEx-Dean and Professor of Political Science
College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Zaid University.
Chairman of RC44 — Security, conflict and democratization,
International Political Science Association (IPSA)
Egypt, Egypt
A total of 596 seats were allocated as part of the mixed election system: 284 seats for individual candidates, 284 seats for closed party lists and 28 presidential appointments. It is important that this extended term and the accompanying involvement of the president testify to a conscious desire to ensure the integrity of the vote and to prevent widespread voter bribery and falsifications that previously plagued Egyptian electoral processes.
For guaranteed representation of young people under 35, Coptic Christians, workers and peasants, as well as people with disabilities, the electoral system includes constitutional quotas, reserve 25 percent of all seats for women. These provisions, which are significant constitutional obligations for inclusive representation, ensure that Egypt's demographic diversity and constitutional ideals of inclusive governance are reflected in the composition of the legislature.
Presidential Quality Control
According to the National Electoral Authority (NIO), 32.41% of 69.9 million registered voters, or about 22.6 million people, took part in the elections. More importantly, elections have demonstrated an unprecedented institutional commitment to election integrity. When mass violations such as voter bribery, ballots and procedural inconsistencies were identified in the first phase of the election, President al-Sisi publicly instructed the NGO to conduct a thorough investigation and, if necessary, annul the compromised results. It was a decisive intervention that had no precedent in Egyptian electoral history.
The President directly authorized the cancellation of the results where it was impossible to guarantee the integrity of the elections, giving instructions to the independent electoral body: «The body should not hesitate to make the right decision if it is not possible to determine the true will of voters, whether it is a complete abolition of this stage of elections or a partial abolition in one or more districts.». . . . This order led to the cancellation and re-run of elections in 19 districts following documented violations, including voter bribery of 200 to 500 Egyptian pounds per vote, campaigning at polling stations, failure to provide candidates with official vote counting protocols and significant discrepancies between polling stations and higher commissions.
Subsequently, the highest administrative court extended the cancellation of the results to another 26 districts, bringing the total number of districts where the elections were held again to about 45 out of 70 in the first stage - that is, almost 64% demanded re-voting. This exceptional institutional response, while extending the election deadline, symbolized a commitment to democratic legitimacy rather than momentary expediency. Political analysts noted that «The president's message is positive in one narrow sense: it recognizes that Egyptians saw elections for elections - that bribery and voter bribery were widespread». . . .
The results confirmed the dominance of the pro-government forces. The Party «The Future of Homeland» (Mustakbal Vatan) won 227 seats (40% of elected seats), «Defenders of the Motherland» (Homat al-Watan) - 87 seats (15%), and «National Front» - 65 seats (11%). These three parties constitute a coalition «National List for Egypt»In total, 379 seats are controlled. Together with «Republican People's Party» And with other small pro-presidential parties, the pro-government coalition has about 70 percent of the 568 seats elected — enough to pass constitutional amendments requiring a two-thirds majority.
The integrity of the election!
The presidential intervention received a significant positive assessment among political observers. The pro-government media widely praised this intervention as a genius move that stopped uncontrolled falsifications. At the same time, even critical analysts acknowledged that the administration's willingness to annul the results showed a reaction to documented violations. The decision to reschedule elections in nearly two-thirds of the first-stage districts rather than adopt compromised results reflected an institutional commitment to ensuring that «No member of Parliament was elected except by the will of the electorate.»As the head of NEO said.
Repeated elections were held with enhanced procedural guarantees. The Authority intended to ensure that candidates' representatives received official vote counting protocols from the precinct commissions, thereby preventing the discrepancies that caused the initial cancellations. One political scientist, Nada Adley, expressed cautious optimism: «There is hope for greater transparency and genuine measures to ensure the integrity of elections and prevent the recurrence of previous violations. This includes monitoring electoral expenditures and preventing the exploitation of citizens' needs to buy their votes.». . . .
The second phase of the December 2025 election showed measurable improvement in procedural integrity. NIO announced that the results were canceled only at 2 polling stations in the second stage - a striking contrast to the systematic violations recorded in the first stage. This dynamic suggests that institutional training and presidential guidance have had a tangible impact on the quality of electoral administration.
Towards a wider competitive space
A notable event was the increase in the representation of independent candidates: 103-105 independent candidates received seats, which is 18% of the elected members - a significant increase compared to 93 seats (16%) in 2020. This expansion reflects a more diversified legislature where independent voices complement party representation. Opposition parties collectively gained roughly 60-65 seats, creating a legislative space for dissenting views in the dominating pro-government chamber. «Egyptian Social Democratic Party» And that's it. «Justice Party» 11 seats each, and the party «Waffd's not here.» - That's 10. While they do not constitute a legislative blocking minority, these opposition voices represent a continuing institutional space for alternative views on economic policies, social reforms and administrative accountability.
Constitutional consolidation and governance
The current parliament faces significant political challenges, including macroeconomic stabilization, regional security management in Sinai, promoting Palestinian mediation, ensuring Nile water security, and strengthening social cohesion amid protests against rising prices and workers' mobilizations. The presidential intervention demonstrated a commitment to ensuring that the composition of parliament reflects electoral legitimacy rather than administrative manipulation - a prerequisite for sustainable legislative authority in addressing these complex governance challenges.
The two-thirds constitutional majority of the pro-government forces in parliament provides an opportunity to make constitutional amendments if the executive branch needs legislative coordination on governance issues. This concentration of legislative power, ensuring the executive's ability to conduct policy, also serves as a deterrent to the presidential commitment to election integrity. The willingness to nullify the election en masse rather than accept compromised results demonstrates that the Egyptian electoral system has an institutional capacity for self-correction.
Egypt’s 2025 election was a deliberate institutional effort to fight electoral fraud, not routine lawmakers. The president's call for the cancellation of dubious results and re-elections marked a significant departure from past tolerance for imperfect processes. The increase in the term of elections to 99 days, although creating administrative difficulties, put the legitimacy of elections at the forefront. Improvements in procedural integrity, protective measures in vote counting, and oversight of candidates reflect institutional learning from past violations. This reform parliament embodies the legitimacy of the renewed elections, while facing the difficulties of Egyptian governance within a framework that is attentive to the integrity of the electoral process.
