Friday 03/Oct/2025 – 02:26 PM
The trade union elections are a natural opportunity to renew blood and pumping new energies into professional institutions, but the midterm elections for the Medical Syndicate this year reveal a much deeper crisis than just electoral competition, so what is going on does not reflect the image of one house that includes all doctors, as much as it reflects the case of polarization and bias that threaten the foundations of the union work itself.
The announcement of the Eastern Doctors Syndicate is its public support to one of the candidates on its official page was not just a passing gag, but rather an explicit violation of the principle of neutrality in any professional union, which was described by the head of the General Committee for the elections as the first of its kind in the history of the union’s elections, and the most dangerous is that the Eastern Captain, who at the same time shall head the presidency of the electoral committee in the governorate, also declared his bias to a specific candidate, before he had a pressure The objections, which raises a deeper question. Do some of those in charge of the electoral process really believe in the value of neutrality, or is it the convictions and prior affiliations that impose their word?
The major problem does not lie at the moment of voting, but rather after it, if a candidate does not have the support of the current councils, will the door be opened for cooperation and joint work, or will the union remain a captive that motivates mutual motivation and narrow electoral accounts? Will the union be managed in the spirit of public interest, or with the endless mindset of “old battles”?
In fact, what is happening today puts the union in front of a real test, is it an institution to serve all doctors and defend their rights, or is it a battlefield that is managed by the logic of gains and losses? The erosion of trade union neutrality, if it continues, not only threatens the integrity of the elections, but also blows confidence in the union as a mosque and neutral for its members.
The elections will end, and a winner and a loser will be announced, but what will remain more important than all of this is the next day, how will the winner deal with his opponents? How will the current council deal with those who were not their favorite candidate? Here the seriousness of the union and its ability to overcome polarization is determined, because the union is not a battlefield, but a house for all doctors, and an entity that does not acquire its legitimacy except from its neutrality and embrace to all its members without exception.
