__________________________________________________________
The SSNP and the Lebanese
Elections of 1947
Electoral
abuses, pressure and intimidation in order to
prevent
the SSNP from gaining any political foothold
Published
in Al-Zawba’ah: Volume 2 - Issue 8 , July 1998
(by Dr. E. Melhem)
Antun Sa’adeh entered the
battle of Lebanese parliamentary elections in
1947 despite the fact that he was in hiding. The
party fielded candidates in most electorates of
Lebanon. All of them had one platform that was
drawn up by the leadership of the party, i.e.,
Sa’adeh and his advisers. (The organizational
structure of the SSNP provided for the existence
of two councils: a supreme council as the
policy-making organ and an executive one,
composed of functional administrative officials.
Members of the two councils advised Sa’adeh on
party management and policy formulation.)
The SSNP platform was composed of basic
political, economic and social principles that
aimed to introduce change and reform at all
levels. The substantive issue at stake was the
independence of Lebanon. The SSNP wanted to make
Lebanon’s independence “a reality, not a new
type of colonization.”[1]
Thus, at the political level, the party’s
program stressed the necessity of supplementing
the first step of political independence with
other steps in order to achieve “true
independence.”[2]
In this context, Sa’adeh said: “Political
independence is built on national consciousness,
national will and economic-socio-political
bases. Otherwise it would not be true
independence.”[3]
Hence, the program detailed the economic and
socio-political bases for true independence and
the numerous reforms needed in various aspects
of life.
The SSNP also wanted to keep Lebanon as a ‘nitaq
daman’, i.e., an entity in which its
citizens enjoy freedom of speech and thought and
the party can work and preach its principles
freely.[4]
Hence, the five basic principles included in the
party electoral program for political reform
read as follows:
1) Fighting opportunism and the reactionary
mentality.
2) Fighting foreign interference in the internal
politics of the country.
3) Establishing the responsible representation
of the people’s interests through political
parties which have nationalist aims and general
policies for the public.
4) Abolishing confessional representation and
replacing it by nationalist representation.
5) Guaranteeing the freedoms of meeting,
expression and opinion.[5]
Other issues revealed in the electoral program
of the SSNP were related to Lebanon’s
relationship with other Arab states. Two
principles were outlined in this regard. The
first called for strengthening economic and
cultural unity as well as the political ties
between Lebanon and the other political states
of geographical Syria.[6]
The second principle asserted that Lebanon
should participate with the other Syrian states
in repelling attacks and dangers to any member
state, and should co-operate with the Arab
states through the Arab League.[7]
The elections of 1947, consequently, provided an
opportunity for the SSNP to explain its stand on
Lebanon. In its electoral campaign, the party
confirmed its respect for the existence of
Lebanon as an independent state. The party’s
electoral program, moreover, addressed the
question of Lebanon’s independence and
considered it as the most important question.
All socio-economic and political issues were
discussed in relation to this major question.
The outcome of the elections was disappointing
for the SSNP and for other political parties.
The government was accused of abusing the
electoral processes in most constituencies. The
opposition published a book[8]
in which it documented the government’s
electoral abuses, pressure and intimidation.
Independent newspapermen and foreign observers
joined the opposition in condemning the
government. As Jacob Landau commented:
Although it is customary for the opposition- as
in this instance [i.e., the elections of 1947] -
to charge the Government with intimidating the
electors and stuffing the ballot boxes, as well
as with other misdeeds, one finds also,
sometimes, that fairly independent Lebanese
newspapermen sorrowfully acknowledge large scale
bribery and corruption in their national
elections, along with foreign observers.[9]
In their article “Confessionalism and Feudality
in Lebanese Politics,” Hess and Bodman give an
unequivocal impression that the elections of May
1947 were fraudulent. As they put it:
The press of Beirut unanimously exposed and
condemned a series of electoral abuses which, it
was charged, ranged from the stuffing of ballot
boxes to the widespread use of government
functionaries in the various electoral districts
to influence, and in some cases browbeat, the
voters.[10]
The same authors asserted that “the outcry
against the alleged abuses was widespread and
vociferous, going so far as a refusal by some
newspapers to recognize the new Chamber.”[11]
Indeed, the alleged abuses were evident in the
outcome of the elections. The government won 47
out of the 55 seats. As George Britt, a foreign
observer, commented, the elections “represented
such a sweep for the President that the outcome
was to become known as ‘the Puppet Parliament’.[12]
The SSNP failed to win any seats despite
vigorous campaigning.[13]
In his turn, Sa’adeh accused the authorities of
ballot rigging to prevent the party from gaining
a political foothold.[14]
Generally speaking, the elections resulted in
aggrieved political feelings. The already tense
relationship between the SSNP and the
Administration further deteriorated. For the
next two years the two were locked in a bitter
struggle during which Sa’adeh stepped up his
attack on the regime and its mentality.
The impact of Sa’adeh’s anti-government campaign
expressed itself in growing popular discontent
with the Government’s policies on the one hand,
and on-going revival of the SSNP on the other.
This made the authorities more determined to
eliminate the SSNP from the political scene. To
achieve this objective, the government resorted
to 'harassment and tyranny'. As an SSNP
publication states:
SSNP members were dismissed from government
offices and pressured out of civil service
posts. Party meetings and large gatherings were
proscribed on flimsy excuses of ‘maintaining
order and tranquillity’. Party publications were
intermittently banned or confiscated...[15]
