Behind the scenes, battles no less fierce than what appears in the context of electoral competition in Egypt are being waged, among the most prominent of which are attempts to obtain a “distinctive” electoral symbol that may grant its holder a measure of social prestige or help consolidate his image among voters. Symbolic capital in the popular consciousness is no less important than political discourse, as some symbols have become associated in Egyptians’ collective memory with social and cultural connotations that are hard to overlook, such as the palm tree, the crescent and the scales.
Egyptian political life came to know symbols with the passing of the Law on the Exercise of Political Rights No. 73 of 1956, as Article 29 of it stipulated that the name of every candidate in elections, and every matter put to a referendum, be paired with a colour or symbol determined by a decision of the Ministry of Interior, according to what the law’s executive regulations stipulated. Over the decades, the race for symbols turned into a hidden arena of influence, fought by parties and political forces seeking to monopolise the most influential marks, in a scene that reveals another side of the battle for awareness in Egyptian elections, where the competition is not only over votes.
Although the law regulates the process of choosing symbols for candidates, the struggle over them is not free of behind-the-scenes manoeuvring, pressure and intensive contacts made at the last moment to reserve the distinctive ones for candidates of the pro-government parties close to the authorities, as informed sources who spoke to “Zawia3” confirm.
During the parliamentary elections that begin on 10 November this month, the “National Election Authority” offered 183 symbols for candidates in the individual system and 148 symbols for the lists, ranging from plant, animal and industrial symbols to everyday objects, to cover the needs of candidates in the various districts, especially in light of the competition between independents and party representatives. However, some symbols remain more attractive than others because of the positive connotations they carry in the popular psyche, such as “the palm tree”, “the lion”, “the key” and “the scales”, for example; these are symbols seen as carrying meanings of strength, justice or blessing, which makes them a target that candidates race for.
On the other hand, complaints emerge from candidates who believe that the major parties or influential figures enjoy priority in obtaining the “distinctive” symbols, so that the symbols themselves become a reflection of the balance of power within the electoral scene, and a symbolic means of displaying political influence and clout before actual voting begins.
The experience of Ahmed Abdel Rabbo, candidate of the Egyptian Social Democratic Party in the Tanta First district in Gharbia Governorate, reflects this hidden side of the competition. On the morning of 8 October, he was preparing to submit his candidacy papers for the 2025 House of Representatives elections, and he arrived at the court premises a full eight hours before candidacy registration opened, keen to be the first applicant. He tells Zawia3: “I stood as the first person in front of the court door, and no one came before me.” A number of his friends accompanied him to the Tanta court complex to witness with him the moment of his official candidacy, in the hope that this would give him the chance to obtain an early number on the list, and thus to choose the symbol he wanted before the other candidates.
But the surprise, as Abdel Rabbo recounts, was the intervention of a group of people he described as “thugs” to prevent him from heading the queue, as they assaulted him and pushed him away by force before the committee’s door opened at eight in the morning: “They assaulted me, took my glasses and pushed me out of the queue, and the story ended with a clash between me and them.”
Abdel Rabbo filed an official report with the prosecution to document the incident, demanding that the camera footage be retrieved, and noting that he did not receive sufficient protection even though the incident took place during the candidacy process. He says: “I set off at two after midnight because the regulations stipulate distribution by order of arrival, and I was the first person there, and yet number 15 was what I got.”
He adds in disapproval: “Where were those who got the numbers (1, 2, 3, 4?) None of them was present in front of the court; they were in their homes and the numbers went to them.” He affirms that the fight was documented in a video clip, and that the numbers were distributed in an incomprehensible manner, before concluding with a bigger question: “If things were proceeding normally, it would be impossible for one party to obtain the same first number with the same symbol in all districts; this means there is a prior arrangement and interference in organising the matter.”
Monopolising Electoral Symbols
Referring to the list of candidates for the 2025 House of Representatives elections, published on the official website of the National Election Authority, we found that three parties take the top positions in most districts across the republic, namely, in order: the Mostaqbal Watan Party, the Homat Watan Party and the National Front Party. These parties also retain particular electoral symbols that hardly ever leave them from one round to the next, most prominently: the pen, the book, the crown, the diamond and the car. These are symbols that seem to be a fixed part of their electoral identity, as they accompany them from the north of the country to its south without change, while the symbols of independent candidates and small parties differ from one governorate to another.
On the other side, we do not find any of the candidates of the three parties (Mostaqbal Watan, Homat Watan and the National Front) with a symbol beside their name such as: the router, the loaf of bread, a remote control, the Abu Simbel monuments, a sickle, the banana, a knife, a glasses case, a clothes brush, a man’s shirt, a matchbox, trousers, a T-shirt, a gas stove lighter, a garden sofa, the monorail, the high-speed train, dominoes, a car tyre, a kerosene lamp, an ATM, a saw, a safety pin, a microwave… and other “strange” symbols that often go to independents or less fortunate candidates.
While the Mostaqbal Watan Party’s candidates obtained the pen and book symbols, the Homat Watan Party the crown and the diamond, and the National Front took the car symbol, the knife went to candidate Atef Moawad, an independent in the Talkha district in Dakahlia, number 31, while Mohamed Magdy is an independent candidate in the same district too, but his symbol is the saw and his number 35, while Ayman El-Prince, an independent, obtained the toothbrush symbol in the Zawya El-Hamra district of Cairo Governorate; and in Qalyubia Governorate, in the Khanka district, the hockey stick went to Emad Abdel Salam Anaba, independent number 13.
In the Omraniya district of Giza Governorate, the gas cooker was the symbol of candidate Medhat Abdel Tawab, independent number 13, and the iron safe the symbol of candidate Osama El-Prince, independent number 33, while the carrots went to candidate Alaa Mazen, independent number 32, in the Sohag district of Sohag Governorate; in the Al-Monshaa district of the same governorate, the cup went to Amal Wally, independent, number 17, and the comb to Abdel Qader Sorour, independent number 24, in the Kafr El-Zayat district of Gharbia Governorate. In Beni Suef, Osama El-Matrawy’s symbol was the pencil case and his number 11, and the seahorse went to Ali Badr, independent number 9, in the Ehnasia district of Beni Suef as well. And the sickle was the symbol of Mohamed Khater, independent, number 19, in the Mit Ghamr district of Dakahlia.
(The images below are from the National Election Authority website and show the distribution map of a number of symbols)
As for the Faqous district of Sharqia Governorate, we notice a set of symbols that may seem strange, among them the map, which went to Walaa El-Sayed of the Nidaa Misr Party, whose number on the list is 17, while the lighter went to Abu Ragab, the fire extinguisher to Ayman Shaaban and the electric refrigerator to candidate Salah Shoreiba, all of them independents, along with other symbols and numbers that show the extent of discrimination and differentiation in the distribution policy.
For his part, Amr Hashem Rabie, deputy director of the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, explains that allocating symbols is in itself something customary in many countries, but the methods of distributing them are unacceptable, because some candidates take a particular symbol to the exclusion of others, noting that the symbol is also linked to priority on the ballot list: “Priority now goes to the Mostaqbal Watan Party, as if it will take Egypt into paradise,” as he tells Zawia3. He points out that what is happening is “absolute unfairness” because particular parties monopolise the electoral symbols and numbers.
The history of electoral symbols in Egypt goes back 69 years: in Law No. 73 of 1956 on regulating political rights and their exercise, the text of Article 3 bis (f) provided for establishing and applying the system of electoral symbols for candidates of political parties and independents, setting rules regulating electoral campaigning, and prohibiting the use of slogans or symbols, or the carrying out of campaigning activities, of a religious character or based on discrimination on grounds of sex or origin.
But in 2025, after reviewing the list of House of Representatives candidates published on the official website of the National Election Authority, you will notice that no woman topped a candidacy list. Monica Magdy, the candidate of the Reform and Renaissance Party in the Rod El-Farag district of Cairo Governorate, came number 2 on the list, but in the rest of the republic’s districts men top the candidacy lists.
Candidates race to top the electoral lists because some voters find it easier to choose the first numbers instead of searching. The Egyptian Social Democratic Party’s candidate, Ahmed Abdel Rabbo, explains that there are two main reasons why some fight over the first numbers, saying: “There is an assumption among some that voters are not sufficiently educated, and that they will vote for the numbers closest and simplest for them, such as the first, the second and the third. Second, directing voters is easier; when a person stands in front of the polling station and directs his relatives and friends, he tells them: vote for the first one or the first three, which is much easier than telling them to vote for number 15, for example.”
Abdel Rabbo adds: “There is also another factor linked to the nature of the centralised state; some voters want to get close to the authorities. They believe that whoever gets the first numbers is the candidate the state approves of, exactly as used to happen in the era of the National Party, when it took numbers 1 and 2. They therefore see whoever gets these numbers as having a greater chance of winning, so they automatically turn to supporting him, because they believe their victory is a foregone conclusion.”
In addition, Amr Hashem Rabie condemns allowing some candidates to move with complete freedom and spend money without limit, without any fair separation between them; when some obtain particular symbols, they monopolise them and do not give them up, and when one of them is granted priority on the lists, “all of this is unacceptable”, in addition to allowing party bribes to take place, noting that it is rumoured that some parties sell and buy seats while there is no intervention to stop this, and adding: “Here the question is: why is this happening? And why does the National Election Authority close its doors and work only within a narrow framework without looking at what is happening outside? All of this needs amendment and reform.”
The regulations of the National Election Authority stipulate that candidates belonging to any party may request the allocation of the electoral symbol previously allocated to their party as of the 2020 parliamentary elections, on the basis of a letter from the party’s head submitted with the candidacy application, and that these rules do not apply to disputed parties.
This is what “Abdel Rabbo” did not find when he went to the court door in Tanta and was at the head of the queue: “The moment the door opened, the thugs pulled me, assaulted me, took my glasses and threw me out of the queue,” and the story ended with a clash. He affirms that the law stipulates that numbers and symbols are distributed by order of arrival at the committee affiliated with the High Elections Commission, explaining that it is impossible to come across, in all of Egypt’s districts, a single party taking a fixed number with the same symbol and number in every district.
Luck Sometimes Plays Its Part
In the view of Nashwa El-Deeb, the independent candidate in the Imbaba district of Giza Governorate, some parties obtaining particular symbols has been customary for a long time; she notes that the Wafd Party has traditionally been associated with the palm tree symbol, while the National Party was known by the crescent symbol. She explains in her interview with Zawia3: “Parties have the right to choose a fixed symbol that represents them from one election to the next, and this has been the practice for years.”
She adds that when she submits her candidacy papers, she finds in front of her the list of available symbols to choose from, saying: “My symbol has been the ring for three electoral rounds, and I was lucky to get it again.” She continues: “I was afraid I would not get it this time, because people have got used to me with this symbol; for ten years people have known it by heart, and this is very important, because some voters have a basic level of education or cannot read well, so they recognise the candidate easily by his symbol instead of searching for his name.”
As for Abdel Qader Sorour, independent candidate number 24 in the Kafr El-Zayat district of Gharbia Governorate, his luck was not the same. He had hoped to obtain the bunch of grapes symbol, with which he contested the previous elections and reached the run-off, but he was surprised when one of the candidates who had registered before him refused to give up the symbol, which forced him to choose the comb instead. He justifies his choice, telling Zawia3: “Most of the people in the district where I am competing are ordinary people, and the comb symbol is easy for them to remember. I respected others’ wish to keep their symbols, but others did not show me the same consideration. In any case, people know me and they will get used to my new symbol.”
By contrast, Ahmed Abdel Rabbo did not have the luxury of choice, after he lost his chance of obtaining number (1) and the symbol he wanted because of what he described as “restrictions” while submitting his candidacy papers. In the end he chose the loaf of bread symbol, explaining that his choice carries a symbolic meaning about representing citizens who dream of improving their standard of living. He tells Zawia3: “Elections are based on people’s voices choosing who represents them. It is very important for citizens to feel that they are partners in the political process and not marginalised, because this ultimately serves the interest of the state.”
Electoral Justice?
As stipulated in Article 3 of Law No. 198 of 2017 on the National Election Authority, the Authority works to guarantee the right to vote for every voter, and equality among all voters and candidates during referendums and elections, including opening candidacy registration, setting its dates, the procedures, documents and papers that candidates are required to submit, receiving candidacy applications, examining them, verifying that they meet the required conditions, deciding on them, and announcing the names of the candidates. In addition, it sets the rules for the conduct of referendums and elections, their procedures and mechanisms, in a way that guarantees their soundness, seriousness, integrity and transparency.
The deputy director of the Al-Ahram Center for Strategic Studies describes the electoral scene as completely lacking integrity, adding that “each candidate gets a symbol that he clings to and that no one else is allowed to use, and when some are given preference on the lists; these are all unacceptable practices, pointing to a striking exceptional case in the Belqas district of Dakahlia Governorate, where the Reform and Development Party came first, ahead of the Homat Watan Party, and this is unusual.” He continues: “I was following the candidate lists and reading the data, and this is the first time I have come across that; the Reform and Development Party got the stick symbol, and its candidate Ahmed Arafa came first, while Homat Watan came second.”
The candidate data published on the official website of the National Election Authority show that in districts with no Mostaqbal Watan Party candidates, the Homat Watan Party tops the ranking. In the absence of both parties, the National Front Party or independents come first. The exception is the Belqas district of Dakahlia Governorate, where candidate Ahmed Arafa topped the list with the stick symbol, followed by the Homat Watan Party.
In the districts where the Mostaqbal Watan Party is contesting the elections, it always comes first, with no competition over number (1) or over the pen and book symbols.
“Numbers or symbols do not matter to me,” says Nashwa El-Deeb, stressing that the real issue is the person himself: is he influential in his district and does he work among the people or not? She adds: “This is what makes the real difference. Believe me, if my number were 50 or even 90, it would not have made a difference to me. The same goes for the symbol; it is true that I wished to keep the ring symbol, but if I had not got it, it would not have had a substantial effect; it would only have made me put in extra effort to introduce people to the new symbol, nothing more.”
On electoral symbols, “Hashem” explains to Zawia3 that he has seen many symbols, some familiar and some unusual, saying: “Symbols such as the knife, the sickle and sharp tools in general are undesirable, and there are many symbols that are unbecoming to use.”
The struggle over symbols is not new; rather, it goes back decades, especially during the era of the National Democratic Party, which monopolised the political scene for many decades. With the start of the adoption of the electoral symbols system in the 1980s, as a means of making it easier for illiterate voters to choose candidates, symbols gradually turned into a political tool with strong symbolic significance, and some parties began seeking to monopolise the “beloved” or “familiar” symbols that are easy for citizens to remember and to associate with trust or stability.
During that period, the National Party often obtained the best and most distinctive symbols, such as “the crescent”, “the scales” and “the palm tree”, while the less attractive symbols were left to independents or candidates from opposition parties. Over time, symbols became an indirect means of measuring political influence; a party that possesses striking symbols suggests to voters its capacity for control and organisation, which pushed many new parties after the January 2011 revolution to demand a fairer distribution of symbols, as one of the manifestations of equal opportunities among competitors.
Despite the clarity of the legal texts and the decisions issued by the National Election Authority, which are supposed to guarantee integrity and equal opportunities in the upcoming House of Representatives elections, reality confirms that there is a gap between text and application.
While symbols and numbers are supposed to be granted according to announced rules based on order of arrival, there is evidence that reality is witnessing discrimination in favour of particular parties, which makes the competition unequal and reinforces a sense of distrust among some candidates and voters alike.
Editorial correction: The first version of the report stated that the Law on the Exercise of Political Rights bears the number 47 of 1956; in fact it is Law No. 73 of 1956, according to the text of the law linked in the report.
