JEDDAH, 24 April 2005 — The low turnout in the just-concluded municipal elections was due to a growing disillusionment among the voters with the quality of candidates and the confusing and competing claims of hastily prepared campaign agendas, according to some Jeddah residents.

Many voters chose to stay away because they claimed to be overwhelmed with the flood of political advertising stemming from the large number of candidates standing — over 500 for just seven seats in Jeddah.

Many of the candidates made claims and promises that the voting public thought were impossible to follow through. Some lost credibility among the electorate by promising cash payments to voters who vote for them but only after they won.

Jalal Ahmad, 27, said that he decided not to vote because he thought that none of the candidates was good enough to be elected to the municipality. “I was very excited about the election process until I saw the list of candidates.”

Ahmad visited many campaign sites dotted around Jeddah in large hospitality tents to look at their program. He found most of their programs disappointing. “I stopped believing in all candidates because they are in the election for themselves, not to serve the people. It is all an advertising stunt.”

Candidates offered to cure problems that were clearly outside their remit. Rami Abdul Aziz said he noticed one candidate in particular who said he would help find jobs for the unemployed and solve their problems.

“The Ministry of Labor is finding difficulty solving the problem of unemployment. How could this candidate solve such a big problem?” he asked. He later learned that finding jobs is not part of the municipal work.

Ironically, the candidate had two unemployed sons. “How could he solve the problem of many people when he cannot find jobs for his sons? With candidates like this I felt like it is a waste of time voting.”

Abdul Aziz said he spent his Thursday morning fishing rather than visiting a polling center.

Talal Naser, 31, said he did vote, “but I do not know who I voted for.” He found an absence of coherent information about candidates and their programs. Candidates were been given a limited time limit to run their campaign.

“It is impossible for me to visit more than 500 campaigns to look at their program,” said Naser. He thought that television promotion of candidates and their programs would have helped. “This way we would have some general information about candidates.”

Some voters voted the way family pressures directed them. Salem Ahmad Ba Ali said he had no information about candidates or their plans. “My father had a list of candidates that he wanted to vote for. He forced me to go with him and vote for the list, which is totally against the concept of election because I should have the freedom to choose the candidate to vote for.”

He was obliged by his father to vote for the list he gave me. “I am glad I did because I was not going to vote. In my opinion, 99 percent of candidates are unfit to be at municipality.”

Sultan Al-Otaibi, 56, had a stern outlook on voters who had the chance to vote and chose not to.

“Shame on them. People complained in the past a lot about municipality. Now when they have the choice in their own hands, they decide not to vote. This is not a good excuse.”

He felt everyone eligible should have participated. “It is impossible that out of more than 500 candidates, there is not one that they can choose.”

He agreed that it was impossible to visit every candidate’s campaign site, “but it is also impossible for every candidate to visit every house. I think laziness is to blame, not candidates’ programs.”