Integrity and transparency in the Deir al-Balah elections 2026 — a comprehensive reading of Pal-Think's observer role and the electoral process

Publication date: May 2026

Prepared by: the Electoral Observation Unit — Pal-Think for Strategic Studies

Geographic scope: the municipality of Deir al-Balah — Gaza Strip

Introduction: the philosophy of civic observation

Working to entrench the values of democracy and good governance, and out of its national responsibility for building transparent Palestinian institutions, Pal-Think led the widest civic observation of the 2026 municipal-council election in Deir al-Balah. This was no formal monitoring exercise: it was a comprehensive evaluative instrument built on international standards, measuring how far the parties concerned honoured the laws and regulations governing the electoral process, so that the results would reflect the voters' free and informed will.

Observation methodology and operating structure

The institution applied a multi-dimensional monitoring methodology, delivered through a precise administrative and technical structure.

Field and temporal deployment
Observation ran for twelve continuous days (the campaign period) through polling and counting day, with a carefully selected and trained team of 40 observers.

Geographic coverage
Observation covered 13 main polling centres holding 102 polling stations — every residential quarter of Deir al-Balah.
The observation database: data was gathered and analysed through 230 periodic reports built on 64 standard indicators covering every procedural, logistical and security aspect.

Track one: campaign observation, 10–21 April

This phase was the cornerstone for measuring equal opportunity and competitive ethics. Its findings:
Legal-compliance indicator: compliance exceeded 97% — a mark of political maturity among the competing lists and the public.
Institutional neutrality: the security agencies and official institutions scored a striking 100% compliance in maintaining full neutrality and providing a safe environment for all campaign events without discrimination.
Digital-space challenges: the observation team recorded gaps in handling campaigning on social platforms — violations tied to pre-empting the official calendar or using national symbols contrary to the regulations, reflecting the weakness of the legal controls on electronic campaigning compared with field campaigning.
Electoral-silence monitoring: in the 24 hours before polling, the institution recorded a handful of violations — campaigning continuing by text message or undisciplined media discourse — calling for stricter procedural penalties in future.

Track two: polling day (25 April) — the procedural anatomy

On polling day Pal-Think's observers accompanied the boxes from opening to closing. The record includes substantive observations:
Opening and technical challenges: the report documents delayed starts at several stations (15–30 minutes on average) caused by failures in the electronic verification system (USSD) — a technical delay that briefly confused the first queues of voters before it was remedied.
Logistical and security violations: 157 violations were recorded, most notably the use of substitute box seals (plastic ties or adhesive) at some centres instead of the sovereign metal locks — a logistical shortfall the institution judges must not recur if the highest levels of security are to be guaranteed.
Secrecy and integrity of the vote: cases were recorded of attempts to influence voters inside centre grounds, and of ballot papers photographed on mobile phones — a violation of ballot secrecy. Cases of «collective voting» and of influencing illiterate voters were observed at some stations.

Track three: counting — the final transparency

Counting is the true test of transparency. The report's summary:
Field transparency: counting proceeded at most stations in an atmosphere of calm and cooperation, with observers and agents allowed to view and check the papers.
Procedural shortfalls: observers recorded uneven competence among counting teams — some stations did not read out lock numbers or record details clearly — and weak lighting at some counting centres, wearing down teams and observers alike.
Divergent standards: «administrative improvisations» were documented in accepting ballots that failed the technical conditions (unclear marks), producing divergence between stations in the standards for valid and void votes — demanding strict unification of procedural instructions.

Conclusions and strategic recommendations

On the evidence above, Pal-Think concludes that the Deir al-Balah 2026 election was a step forward — but one that exposed procedural and technical gaps demanding immediate treatment:

1 — Logistical sovereignty: strict commitment to the approved official locks and supplies at every stage without exception.

2 — Strict digital oversight: developing dedicated regulations for electronic campaigning and training the lists in complying with them.

3 — Developing the polling environment: guaranteeing polling centres properly equipped in lighting, space, and access facilities for persons with disabilities.

4 — A technical emergency protocol: paper alternatives ready for immediate use should the electronic verification systems fail, to avoid delaying the start of polling.

Conclusion: through this extended report, Pal-Think affirms that the purpose of observation is to build on the positives and treat the gaps. Electoral integrity is a cumulative process, and what our observers recorded is an important working document for all parties concerned with developing the Palestinian democratic process and raising it to world standards.