Quality over Quantity: Lessons from Algeria’s Application and Abolishment of Gender Quotas

The retraction of Algeria’s gender quota system in the post-Hirak period illustrates the contested terrain of political legitimacy, state control, and gendered power. Introduced in 2011 amid regional instability following the Arab uprisings, gender quotas were presented as a progressive step toward women’s political inclusion. Yet, the quota functioned more as a tool of state co-optation than as a genuine commitment to gender equality. After the Hirak protests (2019–2021), which demanded systemic political reforms and rejected state-led mechanisms of control, the Algerian government abolished the quota in 2020 under the pretext of meritocracy. This study examines how male and female politicians discursively framed the quota’s implementation and retraction, exploring the narratives that justified these shifts. Using an intersectional and post-colonial feminist framework, the research draws on ethnographic fieldwork and semi-structured interviews with local and national politicians as well as media discourses to examine competing discourses on gender quotas. Findings show that many politicians—both men and women—portrayed the quota as an externally imposed mechanism undermining merit-based politics. Conversely, some women elected under the quota and activists viewed its removal as reinforcing patriarchal structures. The state’s rationale for retracting, emphasizing “fair” political competition, obscured persistent structural barriers to women’s participation. By framing quotas as undemocratic, the regime strengthened its control over political representation while sidelining gender-inclusive reforms. The discourse around the quota’s retraction also reflects a historical pattern in Algeria: women’s political inclusion is co-opted in moments of crisis to bolster state legitimacy, only to be discarded when inconvenient. Following the Hirak, male-dominated politics reasserted itself, and female parliamentary representation fell sharply from 31.6% to 8.35%. The study argues that eliminating gender quotas was less a response to popular reform demands than a strategic effort to consolidate power and maintain exclusionary politics. By analyzing post-Hirak political rhetoric through a post-colonial feminist lens, this research contributes to broader discussions on gender, authoritarianism, and political discourse in post-protest societies.