The Council of Ministers endorsed the call initiated by the Ministry of Interior to the electorate of the second district of Mount Lebanon-Metn and the second district of Beirut (Moussaytbeh, Bauchrieh and Rmeileh) to elect two deputies for the Maronite and Sunnite seats in replacement of the two martyrs MPs Pierre Gemayel and Walid Eido. This short study puts forward, through the presentation of the results of the 2005 elections in these same districts, an attempt to make projections and forecasts of the upcoming partial election with the assumption that all the political forces - candidates and voters- will participate.

Metn
The political chart of the Metn caza is regarded as being the most diversified and balanced of all electoral districts in Lebanon. Metn is indeed a caza that includes multiple political forces: in the forefront, the party of the Phalanges and that of the Gemayels, the Syrian National Party and the Tachnak party. It is also the base of the historical Lahoud and Murr leaderships and features a strong (new) presence of the Free Patriotic Movement and many other political forces such as those of the Moukheiber family and the Lebanese Forces. In 2005, the parliamentary elections in this caza recorded the strongest participation rate (51,2%) since 1960, date on which the Metn became an electoral district with the borders that we know today; the participation rate of 2005 was higher than that recorded during the 1972 elections (50,9%). All the long-established political forces in addition to the rising ones took part in the last turn. Two lists then clashed: the list of “Reform and Change” (which gathered an alliance between the CPL and the party of Michel El Murr alongside the Tachnak party) and that of the “Opposition” (which gathered the Phalanges, the Democratic Renewal Movement, the LF, the Communist Party as well as local forces). One distinction was recorded: the National Syrian Social Party had participated in these elections on its own for the first time after having failed to dissuade General Michel Aoun from including the party’s candidate in the list of “Reform and Change”. However, the two parties did a barter of voice or a strategic vote for Deputy Michel El Murr and the Tachnak party candidate. An almost unprecedented climate of effervescence and militancy characterized these elections. The list of “Reform and Change” recorded an extensive and unexpected victory: the elected members of the list having won approximately 56,840 votes (for MP Ibrahim Kenaan) and 48,662 votes (for MP Michel el Murr) against 29,421 votes (for the decease MP Pierre Gemayel) and 19,683 votes (for the candidate Michel Akl). Moreover, the difference between the least voted for member of the “Reform and Change” list and the most voted for member of the “Opposition” list exceeded 23% which corresponds to approximately 20,000 votes. It should be noted that Ibrahim Kenaan got approximately 65,8% of the Christian electorate votes excluding the Armenian votes whereas Pierre Gemayel got only approximately 39% of them, which means that even without the Armenian electorate votes, the difference would have remained large. It is not possible to predict the results of the parliamentary elections in Metn - should they take place and be led by the opposition and the loyalists - and confirm that they will be the same as those recorded in the 2005 elections. Fact remains that the survey carried out end of October 2006 by the Beirut Center for Research and Information in the caza of Metn showed that the Opposition is largely favored: 63% of votes against 37% for the loyalists; and, despite the numerous political developments that occurred since then which possibly impacted the offer of support brought to the Opposition negatively, it is not very likely that the ratio be reversed. It is however important to highlight that an accurate projection would require carrying out new statistical studies evaluating the existing political forces. It is almost certain as well that in the event that Opposition and Loyalists enter seriously in competition, the participation rate will be the highest in the history of parliamentary partial elections in Lebanon when compared to the rate of participation in general elections (2002 Metn partial elections recorded the strongest participation ever at 46,1%). We can also confirm that, if led by the Opposition, these elections will be marked by the greatest interest at the national level from north to south because of the political alignments of all the Lebanese people.

Second district of Beirut
In 2005, the elections in the second district of Beirut proceeded within the boycott of political forces (both candidates and voters). Leading the boycott was the CPL, the “National Labor Circle”, the Tachnak party, the “National Dialogue” party amongst others, which resulted in a drop of the participation rate to approximately 30,8% (Armenian participation: about 4%; Christian participation: about 17% against 30% in 2000).
Despite the decrease in the participation rate in this district, the battle was amongst the fiercest of all three districts in Beirut. This is due to the large number of candidates and the few actual seats provided; it is also due to rough competition in particular on the Orthodox seat for which two candidates of the Future Movement competed against former deputy Adnan Arakji and the candidate of “The Association of Islamic Charitable Organizations”, Badr el Tabech. Only one list was formed in this district made up of five candidates: four candidates of the Future Movement (late Walid Eido, Bahij Tabbara, Atef Majdalany and Nabil de Freje) and one Hezbollah candidate, Amine Cherry, as part of the “Quadripartite Alliance”. The other candidates led their electoral battle separately, despite some co-operation and barter of voice. One of the most notable specifics of the 2005 elections in Lebanon was the non-conformity of Shiites voters to the “list of assembly”. The modest number of Shiites votes collected by the Future Movement candidates led the leaders of this party to accuse Hezbollah of “electoral treason”. Consequently, the leaders of Hezbollah headed by its secretary general Hassan Nasrallah, conducted an unprecedented mobilization campaign encouraging the supporters of Hezbollah to vote for the complete list of “The Mountain Alliance”. The indirect effects of the Shiite attitude in Beirut’s second district had most probably allowed the victory of the entire “Mountain Alliance” list in the Baabda-Aley district, which led to the formation of a parliamentary majority. During the latest survey carried out by the Beirut Center for Research and Information last October, it appeared that the Future Movement gathered 80% of the Sunnites votes which accounts for approximately 40% of the number of voters in this district, whereas the Shiites votes account for only 22% …