The barring of independent election observers from Sunday’s presidential vote in Tunisia reflects a broad crackdown on rights groups ahead of the ballot which President Kais Saied is widely expected to win, activists say.
The Tunisian electoral board, ISIE, says it will not allow observers from I Watch and Mourakiboun to monitor the vote, alleging they received suspicious foreign funds.
The two watchdogs have been monitoring Tunisian elections for fraud since the 2011 uprising that ousted former dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.
His ouster ushered in the Arab Spring regional uprisings, all of which failed except in Tunisia which, for a time, became the only democracy to emerge from the Middle East movements against authoritarianism.
But the north African country’s path changed dramatically soon after Saied’s democratic election in 2019.
He orchestrated a sweeping power grab that included dissolving parliament and replacing it with a legislature with limited powers. He has jailed opposition figures and critics, and his five years in power drew scrutiny in a report issued by I Watch.
Souhaieb Ferchichi, a senior campaigner at I Watch, told AFP the electoral board, ISIE, accused the group of “not being neutral” weeks after the report came out.
Ferchichi acknowledged that his organisation received foreign funds.
But it was done “in a legal framework, with donors that the Tunisian state recognises, such as the European Union”.
ISIE has not responded to AFP’s query on the matter.
Electoral body a ‘tool’
Mourakiboun called the suspicious funding allegations baseless.
In a statement, it said it had “always conducted (election) observations impartially, without ever taking sides with any political faction”.
Saied “refuses any independent or critical body to observe these elections”, said Romdhane Ben Amor, spokesman for the Tunisian Forum for Social and Economic Rights (FTDES).
“ISIE has been transformed into a tool to establish this vision,” Ben Amor added.
Bassem Trifi, head of the Tunisian League for Human Rights (LTDH), said the electoral board’s decision to bar the two watchdogs from monitoring was “arbitrary” and showed “a restriction and narrowing of civic space”.
The election, he said, “will be neither democratic nor transparent”.
Trifi described the current political climate as “scary and catastrophic” owing to the authorities’ crackdown on dissent with “the judiciary being used to sideline candidates, politicians, and activists”.
Authorities have in recent months stepped up fiscal checkups among NGOs receiving foreign financial aid, threatening also to adopt a law limiting such funds.
In September, Saied accused organisations of receiving “huge sums” of money from overseas with a “clear intent to interfere with Tunisia’s internal affairs”.
The country has since “entered a repressive process which could result in the disappearance of independent organisations within a year”, according to Ben Amor.
Alexis Deswaef, vice-president of the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), said there is a “concentration of powers in the hands of a single man who wants to do without intermediary bodies”.
Saied has “sidelined trade unions, NGOs, opposition parties and journalists”, Deswaef told AFP while on a visit to Tunisia.
New York-based Human Rights Watch said Monday that more than “170 people are detained in Tunisia on political grounds or for exercising their fundamental rights”.
Jailed opposition figures include Rached Ghannouchi, head of the Islamist-inspired opposition party Ennahdha, which dominated political life after the revolution.
‘Dictatorial’
ISIE barred 14 hopefuls from joining the election race, after it said they had failed to provide enough signatures of endorsement, among other technicalities.
The result has been that Saied faces just two challengers. One of them, Ayachi Zammel, is in prison.
More than 60 journalists, commentators and others have been jailed under Decree 54, enacted by Saied in 2022 to combat “false news”, according to the National Union of Tunisian Journalists.
Critics have condemned the decree’s use as a stifling of political dissent.
It is all part of “a climate of fear”, said Deswaef, of FIDH.
“There is an absence of checks and balances, with a parliament that fully agrees with the president and a debased judiciary whose judges are dismissed or transferred upon making a displeasing decision”.
He said authorities have “strategically returned in a relatively short period of time to a system that can be described as dictatorial”.
