On April 25, Palestinians will vote in local elections to choose representatives to municipal and village councils for four-year terms. These elections come after years of repeated postponements of national votes, with no legislative elections held since 2006.

In cities across the occupied West Bank, such as Ramallah, Al-Bireh, and Nablus, billboards featuring local candidates line the streets, while in villages, posters of candidates have been erected in public spaces.

There is both cynicism and cautious anticipation surrounding these elections, which have become the only remaining electoral mechanism through which Palestinians, however limited, can exercise a form of political participation.

Rather than marking a moment of democratic renewal, these elections reflect the reproduction of governance under constraint. They are both performative and revealing: they demonstrate how, despite constant strain, the absence of sociopolitical stability, depleted resources, and Israeli-engineered fragmentation, Palestinians are compelled to assert their survival through the very structures that constrain them.

This reality is also reflected in where — and for whom — these elections are taking place. Voting is occurring across the occupied West Bank, but in Gaza it is limited to a single municipality: Deir al-Balah, exposing the fractured political and geographic landscape Palestinians are forced to navigate.

Representation with no sovereignty

The Palestinian context is fundamentally undemocratic, not simply because Palestinians have not held national elections for nearly two decades, but because they are ruled by an oppressive power they did not choose.

The Israeli occupation of Palestine, supported by the United States and Western governments, controls and forcibly manages every aspect of Palestinian life. To live in Palestine is to be segregated by force from your own people, to be held hostage under the constant threat of detention or arrest for political thought and participation, and, amid escalating settler expansion, to exist in a permanent state of emergency. This leaves little room for functional or genuine political development.

In Gaza, Israeli control is exercised through bombs and bullets. In the occupied West Bank, however, it operates both through military force and through a dense web of policy and legal structures, enforced with systematic violence.

Within this reality, no policy or official political decision is made without Israeli approval. For years, Palestinians have been forced to watch their own leadership engage in acts of treason and espionage in direct collaboration with Israel.

This is rooted in the structure of the Palestinian Authority, created through the Oslo Accords, which was designed not to serve Palestinian national liberation, but to manage daily life under occupation while absorbing Palestinian resistance into institutional frameworks that could be monitored and contained.

In doing so, the Palestinian Authority has effectively reduced the costs of occupation for Israel by taking on responsibilities that, under international law, fall to an occupying power.

At the same time, Israel has not only maintained its occupation, but expanded it geographically and intensified it militarily to the point of explicit genocide.

Representing whom: the fractured geopolitical reality

The local elections lay bare the consequences of Israel’s ongoing campaign to geographically fragment and dismember Palestinian life over the past five years.

These elections are taking place across 420 local authorities, with more than one million eligible voters. Yet Gaza is largely excluded, while Palestinians with Israeli citizenship and those holding Jerusalem IDs are unable to participate, remaining under Israeli governance. This is without accounting for the fact that more than half of the Palestinian population lives in diaspora and imposed exile.

As a result, the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are excluded from this final remaining avenue of political participation. Even within the occupied West Bank, the geography of voting itself is fractured.

Israeli checkpoints, sporadic closures, and raids on towns and villages, coupled with escalating settler violence and settlement expansion, not only restrict mobility for campaigning, organising, and governance, but continuously reshape the territory itself.

In this context, the jurisdiction, mandate, and capacity of elected representatives are in constant flux. The roles being contested are reduced to maintaining institutional frameworks that reflect external, rather than Palestinian, priorities.

More than this, it is important to note that these elections are limited to a single political faction, the Fatah party of the Palestinian Authority. This is primarily due to political repression by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which over the past two years have clamped down on Palestinians affiliated with other political factions. Yet even those within Fatah are structured in a way that appeases Israeli interests.

Rather than genuine representation, Palestinians are offered largely symbolic gestures. What they require instead is a protective body: one capable of preventing escalating settler attacks that are claiming Palestinian lives at unprecedented rates, and one that does not operate under the constraints of discriminatory and oppressive Israeli laws and policies.

Elections to appease the West

For Palestinians, these elections are a testament to the ability to persist and negotiate within ever-shrinking possibilities for self-governance.

After the Oslo Accords, Israel was not only alleviated of its obligations toward the occupied Palestinian people, but Palestinians were also held within an illusion. This illusion, sponsored by the Oslo Accords, created the outward form of a state without its substance, placing Palestinians in a prolonged state of political limbo.

Western leadership has consistently blamed Palestinians for failing to establish democratic governance. International bodies have repeatedly called for elections, yet have not once acknowledged the limitations, obstructions, and abuses imposed by Israel. More than this, there is no acknowledgement of the conditions required for Palestinian liberation to enable the development of a governance framework that answers to Palestinian needs rather than those of Israel and its Western allies.

In this context, these elections should not be dismissed as meaningless. Their meaning lies elsewhere: they do not reflect the free expression of collective will, but they do show a deliberate negotiation with constraints imposed from above.

These elections are being held in a context of systemic ethnic cleansing, Israeli-enforced division, and genocide. They show that, in the absence of territorial continuity, Palestinians are attempting to sustain some form of institutional continuity, even if the institution itself remains fundamentally constrained.

They reflect an effort to maintain political and institutional life under occupation, in a world that too often sees the Palestinian as dead, or incapable.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.