Society Magazine

What Does Voting Really Mean? A Look At Saudi Arabian Women’s First Election

Posted on the 13 January 2016 by Juliez
Screen Shot 2016-01-12 at 5.48.44 PM

Saudi Arabian women voters

Saudi Arabia is known for limiting women’s rights. Women who live in the conservative Islamic nation must wear an abaya, a full-length black cloak covering their hair and body, and an additional scarf over the face is optional but recommended. Women cannot travel, marry, or attend university without permission from male family members. As protests recently revealed, many Saudi Arabian women also still cannot drive, despite a tentative new policy meant to enforce the right.

But as of 2015, they can vote. What’s more, they can run for office.

Saudi Arabia is one of the last nations in the world to grant women suffrage. Although the nation held its first election since 1964 just a decade ago in 2005, according to BBC, women were not allowed to participate. King Salman’s 2015 decree granting women’s suffrage actually fulfilled a promise made in 2011 by the now-dead King Abdullah, who was also the first to allow women into the Shura Council — an appointed body that advises the king and serves some legislative purposes.

Because it is an absolute monarchy, however, the 2015 elections in which women participated were only municipal: They placed officials on councils governing zoning ordinances and other local issues, although some elected individuals may later be appointed to positions in the larger government. Even so, around 980 female candidates ran for spots among the 2,100 seats on 284 councils in the December 12th election. These women were celebrated for doing so as many anticipated that having women in decision-making roles might do much to address the daily needs of women in the country more broadly — such as developing more resources like nurseries and youth centers as well advocating for women’s civil rights and quality of life. Although few women were expected to win, as only 130,000 women were registered to vote compared to 1.4 million men, 18 women emerged victorious.

Though the election was praised as “historic” by the mainstream media, it seems public opinion in Saudi Arabia may have been leaning in this direction longer than Westerners previously realized. One candidate, Lama al-Sulaiman, reminded news consumers that “women here are doctors and engineers – it’s not like women aren’t there” and criticized the international media’s tendency to characterize Saudi Arabian women as helplessly oppressed. Additionally, Saudi Arabian men weren’t universally opposed to women’s progress in the nation either: As Mona Abu Suliman — a consultant and TV personality — claimed, only a minority of Saudi Arabians view women’s suffrage as inherently undesirable. “The majority,” she said, “is either neutral or accepting.”

Even so, despite gaining the right to vote itself — as well as apparent public support for that right — Saudi Arabian women still had to navigate numerous, infuriating obstacles to actually exercise the right. Campaigning was difficult for many female candidates because regulations barred them from interacting directly with male voters. Women instead reached the majority of their constituency through proxy speakers, electronic recordings, and the Internet. In many conservative communities, they also had to contend with the stigma of presenting themselves as public figures at all.

Female voters also faced a chain of obstacles. Because women are required to be accompanied by male relatives while driving, getting to the polls was impossible for many women whose relatives refused to do so. Women were asked to provide national identification cards in order to vote, but must only have family identification and district clerks authorized to grant proof of nationality were often unavailable or untrained. Proof of residency, such as a household bill or deed, was also required but Saudi women cannot own property. Many women were therefore denied access to the appropriate papers, transportation, and time to plan, which effectively prohibited their ability to vote despite their right to do so.

Many Saudi women say their experience during this election was evidence of a larger, systemic dynamic called “guardianship,” which needs to change. They argued that until women gain full rights on the personal level — including rights related to divorce, inheritance, and child custody — the political right to vote will be meaningless for many.  Adam Coogle of Human Rights Watch summarized this reality by noting that enfranchising women is “symbolically very important,” but is otherwise not a marker of significant progress.

The experience, therefore, begs the questions: Was the election merely a message to the international community, intended to mask some of Saudi Arabia’s more egregious women’s rights violations? Or was it truly an indication that Saudi Arabian women’s lives will continue to improve in the future?

The answers are unclear, although one unnamed female candidate, a doctor, weighed in. “This is to prove that we are citizens,” she said. “And that is more important than winning.”


Back to Featured Articles on Logo Paperblog