The July 2021 Power Grab: A Democracy Under Siege

The circumstances surrounding Saied’s seizure of power were rooted in Tunisia’s prolonged political and economic struggles. Following months of economic decline, healthcare system collapse during the pandemic, and mass protests, Saied invoked emergency powers to assume control. Military forces barricaded parliament headquarters, preventing Speaker Rached Ghannouchi and legislators from entering. Initially, tens of thousands celebrated what many viewed as decisive action against dysfunction, with the Tunisian General Labour Union supporting the move. However, this support proved ephemeral as the power grab evolved into systematic dismantling of democratic institutions.

The constitutional basis for Saied’s actions remains contested. While citing Article 80 of the 2014 constitution, scholars argue he violated requirements to consult the prime minister and parliament speaker. Tunisia lacked a functional constitutional court to adjudicate these disputes, creating a legal vacuum Saied exploited to entrench power.

Democratic Backsliding: The Systematic Erosion of Rights and Freedoms

Following the power grab, Saied consolidated control over all government branches. In September 2021, Human Rights Watch condemned his repressive policies, documenting arbitrary arrests and curtailed rights. The president issued vaguely worded calls to cleanse the country of traitors. By November 2021, Amnesty International reported Tunisia witnessed more military court trials of civilians in three months than in the entire preceding decade.

Judicial independence suffered particularly. In early 2022, Saied dissolved the Supreme Judicial Council, establishing a new body with personally appointed members. Judges opposing his actions faced suspension or investigation. Media freedom came under severe attack, with journalists facing arrest under broadly worded state security laws. According to V-Dem’s 2024 Democracy Report, Tunisia ranked as the world’s fastest-declining democracy, primarily due to judiciary attacks and diminished opposition space.

The 2022 Constitutional Referendum: Cementing Authoritarian Rule

In July 2022, Saied held a constitutional referendum replacing the 2014 constitution with a document dramatically expanding presidential powers. The new constitution eliminated checks and balances, granting the president authority to appoint and dismiss the prime minister and cabinet ministers. It allowed indefinite presidential rule during emergencies and provided no viable removal mechanism.

The National Salvation Front coalition boycotted the process. Despite claims of 94.5 percent approval, turnout reached only 30.5 percent, reflecting widespread disillusionment. The new constitution created a hyper-presidential system, subordinating all government institutions to presidential authority and fundamentally altering Tunisia’s governmental structure from power-sharing to concentrated executive control.

Electoral Manipulation and the 2024 Presidential Election

Tunisia’s October 2024 presidential election, widely condemned as neither free nor fair, marked authoritarianism’s culmination. Of seventeen candidates submitting preliminary paperwork, the Saied-appointed electoral commission approved only three. The commission defied court rulings ordering rejected candidates’ reinstatement, and parliament stripped administrative courts of electoral authority.

No campaign rallies or debates occurred, with nearly all visible materials featuring Saied exclusively. Civil society organizations receiving foreign funding were prohibited from observing, eliminating independent oversight. Saied’s 90.7 percent victory echoed predecessor Ben Ali’s authoritarian playbook, though 28.8 percent turnout revealed deep societal divisions. Human Rights Watch reported over 170 political detainees, while candidate Ayachi Zammel received a twelve-year prison sentence during the campaign.

The Imprisonment of Political Opposition

Systematic targeting and imprisonment of opponents across ideological spectrums defined Saied’s consolidation. Rached Ghannouchi, Ennahda party leader, and Abir Moussi, Free Constitutional Party head, were imprisoned on vague conspiracy charges. Presidential candidates faced harsh treatment, with Ayachi Zammel sentenced to twelve years while voting proceeded.

Decree-Law 54, enacted in 2022 ostensibly for cybercrime, primarily silenced regime critics. Broadly worded provisions allowed prosecution of journalists, activists, and citizens for criticizing government policies. Military courts became routine venues for political trials, denying basic due process protections available in civilian courts.

Economic Crisis and Failed Promises

Saied promised economic revival and anti-corruption measures when elected in 2019. However, his presidency featured economic stagnation and declining living standards. Rather than implementing reforms, he focused on consolidating power. Economic growth plummeted to 0.4 percent in 2023, second-lowest since 2015.

Maintaining fiscal deficits averaging 8 percent of GDP over three years, Saied pursued expansionary policies fueling inflation and undermining job creation. He rejected a 1.9 billion dollar International Monetary Fund loan requiring fiscal reforms, depriving Tunisia of crucial support. Subsidies ballooned to 12 percent of GDP by 2023, up from 2.4 percent in 2010. While justified as protecting the poor, his policies disproportionately harmed vulnerable populations through debt and inflation.

International Response and Geopolitical Realignment

The international community’s response featured ambivalence and competing interests. Western democracies expressed concern but imposed no meaningful consequences. The European Union, prioritizing migration control, provided financial aid to bolster Tunisia’s border enforcement despite authoritarian abuses. Tunisia intercepted 21,000 migrants during early 2024, giving Saied license to continue repression without European censure.

Regional powers welcomed Saied’s actions. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE viewed the coup as defeating political Islam. As Western support waned, Saied courted China, Russia, and Iran. Tunisia and China announced a strategic partnership during his May 2024 Beijing visit. Reports of Russian aircraft and expanding trade signaled significant geopolitical realignment from traditional Western partners.

The Roots of Democratic Failure: Lessons from Tunisia’s Transition

Understanding Tunisia’s democratic collapse requires examining the structural weaknesses that plagued its transition from the outset. Following the 2011 revolution, political elites failed to build robust political parties capable of translating democratic institutions into effective governance and economic prosperity. The constant political infighting, frequent government changes, and inability to address citizens’ economic grievances created widespread disillusionment with democratic processes. Between 2011 and 2021, Tunisia experienced multiple governments and prime ministers, each struggling to implement coherent policies amid parliamentary gridlock.

The failure to accompany political reform with tangible socioeconomic gains for citizens proved particularly consequential. While Tunisia successfully drafted a progressive constitution, held free elections, and established functioning democratic institutions, ordinary Tunisians saw little improvement in their daily lives. High unemployment, regional disparities, corruption, and declining public services fueled cynicism about democracy’s capacity to deliver results. This created fertile ground for populist appeals by figures like Saied, who promised to sweep away the corrupt political class and restore dignity to the people.

The weakness of Tunisia’s security sector, once viewed as advantageous for the democratic transition because it prevented military intervention, ultimately constrained democratic consolidation. The small military and lack of coordination among security forces created vulnerabilities exploited by terrorist groups, including Islamic State attacks in 2015 that devastated the crucial tourism sector. These security failures provided justification for increased spending on security apparatus and delayed necessary security sector reforms, while police brutality and abuse continued largely unchecked, further eroding public confidence in institutions.

Civil society, despite its crucial role in brokering political compromises during the transition and earning international recognition including the 2015 Nobel Peace Prize for the National Dialogue Quartet, ultimately proved insufficient to protect democracy. While civil society organizations remained vocal in opposing Saied’s authoritarian measures, they lacked the institutional power to prevent or reverse the democratic erosion. The systematic targeting of civil society through legal restrictions, harassment, and exclusion from political processes demonstrated the limits of grassroots mobilization against determined authoritarian consolidation backed by security forces.

The Role of Populism in Democratic Erosion

Kais Saied’s rise exemplifies how populist leaders exploit democratic frustrations to dismantle democratic systems. Elected in 2019 with a large majority as a political outsider, Saied presented himself as new, clean, and straightforward in contrast to the discredited political establishment. His campaign emphasized law and order, anti-corruption measures, and direct democracy through local councils, resonating with voters exhausted by elite politicking and economic stagnation. Like other populist leaders including Alberto Fujimori in Peru, Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Saied presented himself as uniquely capable of solving his country’s problems by circumventing traditional political institutions.

Saied’s populist rhetoric intensified after his 2021 power grab, framing opposition to his actions as part of a conspiracy against him and the state. He portrayed migrants as part of a criminal arrangement by pro-democracy forces supported by foreign enemies seeking to change Tunisia’s demographics, scapegoating vulnerable populations to deflect from economic failures. This xenophobic discourse contributed to widespread violence against migrants and asylum seekers while justifying his rejection of international financial assistance. The president’s narrative positioned himself as the sole defender of Tunisian sovereignty against corrupt politicians, foreign interference, and domestic traitors.

The populist playbook extended to delegitimizing all existing centers of power. Saied systematically attacked parliament, political parties, the judiciary, civil society organizations, labor unions, and media outlets, portraying them as obstacles to direct communication between the leader and the people. This strategy effectively isolated Saied from institutional constraints while creating an atmosphere where organized opposition became nearly impossible. The transformation of electoral laws to disadvantage political parties and require all candidates to run as independents further weakened potential organized resistance to presidential authority.

Current State of Tunisian Democracy and Future Prospects

As of early 2025, Tunisia exists in a state of electoral authoritarianism where democratic forms persist without democratic substance. Elections continue to be held, but under conditions that make genuine competition impossible. The parliament functions, but with severely diminished powers and no capacity to check presidential authority. Courts operate, but judicial independence has been comprehensively compromised through presidential appointments and intimidation. This facade of democratic institutions serves to legitimize authoritarian rule while providing no meaningful avenue for political change through constitutional means.

Public opinion remains deeply divided, with Saied retaining some support particularly in certain regions and among those who view him as preferable to the discredited parties of the democratic period. However, the extremely low turnout in both the 2022 constitutional referendum and 2024 presidential election, particularly among young voters, reveals widespread disengagement from political processes. Many Tunisians express resignation rather than enthusiasm, seeing little prospect for meaningful change through either continued acceptance of Saied’s rule or opposition to it.

The economic situation continues to deteriorate, with inflation eroding purchasing power, unemployment remaining stubbornly high, and public debt reaching unsustainable levels. Saied’s rejection of international financial assistance and refusal to implement necessary reforms have left Tunisia increasingly isolated economically. The government’s reliance on subsidies and social spending to maintain political stability has created a fiscal crisis that threatens to trigger broader social unrest. Some observers warn that Tunisia faces potential explosion if economic conditions continue to worsen without political outlets for frustration.

Opposition movements face severe constraints but have not disappeared entirely. Despite arrests, harassment, and legal restrictions, various civil society organizations, labor movements, and political activists continue to voice criticism of Saied’s regime. Periodic protests occur, though security forces routinely disperse them. The National Salvation Front coalition continues to call for Saied’s resignation and early elections, though its demands go unheeded. Whether this resistance can coalesce into an effective movement for democratic restoration remains uncertain, particularly given the regime’s willingness to employ repression and the opposition’s organizational weaknesses.

Regional and Global Implications

Tunisia’s democratic collapse carries significant implications beyond its borders. As the sole success story of the Arab Spring, Tunisia’s fate is often interpreted as indicative of broader regional trends regarding democratization prospects in the Arab world. The country’s regression to authoritarianism reinforces pessimistic assessments about democracy’s viability in the region and may discourage democratic movements elsewhere. Authoritarian regimes in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE can point to Tunisia’s failures to justify their own resistance to political liberalization.

The international community’s ineffective response to Tunisia’s crisis establishes troubling precedents for democratic backsliding globally. The willingness of European democracies to prioritize migration control over democratic principles demonstrates how competing interests can override commitments to democratic values. This pragmatic accommodation of authoritarianism may embolden other leaders contemplating similar power grabs, particularly when they control resources or cooperation deemed valuable by Western powers.

For democracy promotion efforts worldwide, Tunisia’s experience offers sobering lessons about the fragility of democratic transitions and the insufficient protective power of institutional design alone. The country possessed many factors considered favorable for democratization, including relatively high development levels, educated population, homogeneous society, and weak military. It successfully navigated initial transitional challenges, adopted a progressive constitution, and established functioning democratic institutions. Yet these achievements proved reversible when economic frustrations combined with populist demagoguery and institutional weakness.

Conclusion

Tunisia’s transformation from the Arab Spring’s democratic beacon to yet another authoritarian state represents one of the most significant political reversals of the twenty-first century. President Kais Saied’s systematic dismantling of democratic institutions, beginning with his July 2021 power grab and culminating in the manipulated 2024 presidential election, has extinguished hopes that Tunisia would chart a different course for the Arab world. The consolidation of authoritarian rule under a veneer of democratic processes demonstrates the fragility of democratic transitions even under seemingly favorable conditions.

The factors contributing to this collapse, including failure to deliver economic improvements, weakness of political parties, persistence of security sector problems, and rise of anti-system populism, offer crucial lessons for democratic transitions elsewhere. Simply establishing democratic institutions and procedures proves insufficient without addressing underlying socioeconomic grievances and building robust organizational capacity to resist authoritarian backsliding. The international community’s ineffective response, prioritizing migration control and stability over democratic principles, has enabled Saied’s authoritarian consolidation and established troubling precedents for democratic backsliding globally.

Whether Tunisia can reverse its authoritarian trajectory remains uncertain. The low electoral turnout, particularly among youth, suggests deep disillusionment with current political arrangements but not necessarily mobilization for democratic restoration. Economic pressures may eventually trigger social unrest that could force political change, but the direction such change might take is unpredictable. Opposition movements continue to resist despite severe constraints, and civil society has not been completely silenced. However, absent significant internal upheaval or changed international calculus, Saied’s regime appears likely to persist, at least in the near term.

The broader implications of Tunisia’s democratic failure extend far beyond the country’s borders. For the Arab world, it reinforces narratives about incompatibility between Arab societies and democratic governance, potentially discouraging future democratization efforts. For the global community of democracies, it underscores the need for more effective support for democratic transitions and more robust responses to democratic backsliding. Most fundamentally, Tunisia’s experience demonstrates that the struggle for democracy requires not just constitutional frameworks and electoral procedures, but sustained commitment to addressing citizens’ material needs, building strong democratic institutions, and defending democratic principles against authoritarian encroachment. The loss of Tunisia’s democracy serves as a stark reminder that democratic gains, however hard-won, can prove tragically reversible.

Recommended For You