A Collaboration with the University of Pittsburgh

Egyptian judges raise doubts over final presidential election figures

[JURIST] Egyptian judges have raised questions about the accuracy of the final results in September's presidential election, although they said that any irregularities did not affect the outcome of the race. An informal association of judges in Egypt [JURIST news archive] released a report Tuesday in which they acknowledged being unable to completely supervise the election as legally required. The report said that delegates for some candidates were blocked from some polling stations and that voting restrictions were relaxed at some polling stations when large groups of people arrived in state vehicles. The report concluded that the alleged violations would not have changed the outcome of the country's first contested presidential election, in which incumbent President Hosni Mubarak [official profile; BBC News profile] won with 89 percent of the vote. The report is in line with reports from monitoring groups [JURIST report] that tracked violations but said they would not have changed the results. Also Wednesday, the Muslim Brotherhood [Wikipedia backgrounder] said that it was withdrawing some candidates for parliamentary elections that began Wednesday in order to create a broader opposition coalition. Mubarak's National Democratic Party [official website, English version] is expected to dominate the elections, which continue into December. The Daily Star has more.

About Paper Chase

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible format.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.