ABSTRACT
Although King Fahd bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz introduced major governance innovations on March 1,1992, the first municipal elections in the kingdom's history were only held in 2005, when King ‘Abdallah bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz supervised the exercise. To be sure, the decision to hold these elections was reached by the Council of Ministers in 2003, which meant that Fahd technically authorized them, even if the late monarch was largely incapacitated at the time. While members of the military and women were excluded from the process, and the voting age was fixed at 21 — in a country where over 50% of the population was less than 15 years old — it was somewhat understandable that the voting did not raise great enthusiasm. It may be safe to argue that the electorate was unsure what municipal councils would presumably do, what kind of prerogatives they may have, and how they might cooperate with the ruling family. Consequently, participation was weak, with many voters falling back into time-tested tribal considerations. As discussed below, Riyadh skirted a key benefit of municipal elections, with many Al Sa‘ud officials fearing that they would be perceived as a referendum. What both the Al Sa‘ud and Sa‘udi citizens agreed upon, however, was that the 2005 municipal elections were a first step in a long process of necessary reforms. Everyone understood that key obstacles remained, including the existing duality between elections and appointments, given that only half of 1,236 hopefuls, or 608 winners, served in 178 councils across the country. By 2009, when the next elections were scheduled, the kingdom's municipal councils reached 285, although the planned October 31, 2009 voting was postponed until September 22, 2011. The duality problem was not the only confusing matter. Voters were also bewildered by the putative prerogatives of municipal councils and the uncertain conditions associated with women, who could not cast ballots but, presumably, formed a key constituent of municipal activities. Even the rather high voting age posed a problem. As discussed below, voters were further worried about the prospects of broadening the participatory process to include the Majlis al-Shurah, which was the country's premier “legislative” outlet.
