Manama: Asked why he chose not to run in this year's election, despite the fact that he was in politics from 2002 to 2006, former politician Ali Matar responded: "My mother told me not to run. She believed that neither the family nor I should go through any more dirty tricks to bar me from reaching the lower chamber," said the Arabic teacher and imam at one of Manama's largest mosques.
Dirty tactics today seem to be an integral part of the campaign trail. Muneera Fakhroo, a lecturer at the University of Bahrain and a social activist, ran in the 2006 elections but she had two faults: she was a woman running in a male bastion and she was a liberal figure in a conservative constituency.
SMS messages doubted her religious commitment and questioned her integrity. Many of her political banners were ripped up and her pictures were often defaced. But Muneera, supported by friends and sympathisers, refused to be intimidated. She eventually lost the battle for the constituency seat, but not before forcing a second round that saw her garner impressive media and popular support.
Today, Muneera believes that the momentum she gathered four years ago should be the impetus she needs to reach the lower chamber and have one of the 40 seats. She also thinks that she has better chances.
"I enjoy today greater support than I had in 2006," she told Gulf News.
Other candidates whose posters were defaced, removed or ripped up did not go to court. They complained to their constituents under large tents. They contacted the media. But none of them could point fingers or name suspects. Suspicions? Yes, but no names could be uttered for lack of evidence. For most of the victims, they had to opt for inevitable fatalism and resilient fortitude.
"I cannot point my finger at anyone, and especially the people of my constituency," Ahmad Al Mannai, a candidate from the sixth constituency of the Capital Governorate, said after his posters were damaged.
"There is no way it could be any of the candidates running against me because there is deep trust and old brotherhood between us. There is honest competition and none of the competitors would stoop so low as to engage in despicable acts," he said.
Religious interference
However, beyond the wild spread of defamatory remarks and the increasing vandalism of banners, the phen-omenon of blatant involvement of religious figures in campaigning and the misuse of religious facilities has been harshly criticised as dirty tactics to gain often undeserved political mileage.
According to the election laws, the ban on using religion is clear and obvious. Candidates are supposed to pull out of the imamship circuit and refrain from giving sermons until after the final results are announced.
However, they do not seem inclined to let go of a golden opportunity to strengthen their religious aura and address hundreds of people and engage, be it subtly or overtly, in self-serving propaganda.
Some candidates are keen on appearing alongside religious figures or on inviting them to their election tents. "This is crazy. Does this mean that the candidate, if he ever wins, will also take the religious figures with him to the parliament? We are baffled by the extent to which some candidates are ready to go to ensure they are elected regardless of their competence and worth," columnist Sawsan Al Shair wrote.
"The use of public figures for the opening of a candidate's tent is an act that is familiar, not only in Bahrain, but in every place where there are elections. Every community has its attractive personalities. Candidates in the United States use film and television stars, for example.
"Others resort to famous players. We have in Bahrain our own public figures and stars who could be hosted in the opening of election headquarters and provide support for the candidate." Sawsan however takes exception to the involvement of religious leaders.
Yet, for most candidates, the greatest threat to the integrity of elections is not abuses and violations in the name of religion, but the tendency to buy off vulnerable voters.
Ahmad, a local young man, is so pleased with his new mobile that he takes it with him to the mosque and carefully places it on the praying mat in front of him for everyone to see.
"I got it from one of the candidates running in our constituency," he said to a group of people who go to the same mosque. "He brought my family three mobiles, two air conditioners and one cooker. His only wish? That we vote for him on October 23," he said.
The case of Ahmad's family is not an exception. In some areas, where buyers are economically vulnerable, it is becoming a rule.
Voter's request
One voter, seemingly wary of people knocking on his door to ask him to support candidates running in his constituency, put out a notice that read: "To all candidates: We want three split units, three LED television sets, two window ACs, one tall freezer. They must all be of good quality. We also want enough rice, oil, sugar, tea, coffee and milk for six months. Should you give us the above items, we will vote for you. Otherwise, please save your time and ours." A debate has been raging in Bahrain as to whether the household items were a gift that should be accepted or a corruption case that should be resisted.
"There is no ambiguity about it," Fareed Gjazi, a lawyer and member of the 2002-2006 parliament, said. "This is corruption and should not be condoned. Those who talk about helping neighbours in need should defer their assistance until after the elections."
For Bahraini citizen Khalid Qambar, the use of gifts to get the votes of vulnerable people turns the democracy exercise from intelligence and brains to greed and food. But Abdullah Abdul Rahman, a Bahraini national, said that people should not rush into condemning such acts of generosity.
As polls approach, Bahrain candidates are claiming that subtle and overt dirty tricks are increasing, especially because social networking and SMS messaging make it easier to disseminate misinformation.
