Year in Review 2005 – Democratic developments

When King Abdullah II bin al Hussein began his reign in 1999 after succeeding his father, the late King Hussein, the young monarch promised to deliver on democratisation and political liberalisation. This raised hopes among civil society that the historically dominant influence of tribalism would be gradually dismantled. Local and international rights activists now point out that rather than delivering on promises, the king’s reign has been characterised by a failure to implement reforms, a raft of temporary laws, nearly two years without a parliament from 2001 to 2003 and tighter controls on the media and public assembly. "The country has not opened up politically," according to Joost Hilterman, Middle East analyst for the International Crisis Group (ICG) think tank. At the same time, however, "repression has also not become noticeably harsher," he said from the Jordanian capital, Amman. The reasons given for the delays in implementing reforms are Jordan’s geographical position: "Instability in neighbouring Palestine, since March 2003 in neighbouring Iraq and now also in neighbouring Syria, make it risky to open up the system, as people may push for policies that are diametrically opposed to those adopted by the regime, for example the normalization of relations with Israel," said Hilterman. As the new year begins, the failure to enact a modern electoral law ending discriminatory policies against Jordanians of Palestinian origin, to expand media freedoms by revising the 1999 Press and Publications Law, coupled with human rights abuses including the incommunicado detention of prisoners, have undermined faith in the monarch’s will to press for real change, analysts say. Under-representation of Palestinians Liberals were initially optimistic that King Abdullah would change an electoral law which had traditionally favoured tribal East Bank constituencies over the largely Palestinian populations of the cities. At least half of Jordan’s 5.6 million citizens are of Palestinian descent - people whose families settled in Jordan after successive Arab-Israeli wars. A US State Department report on human rights noted in 2005 that seven of Jordan’s 21 ministers and 17 of 110 lower house deputies, were of Palestinian origin. It added, however, that none of the country’s 12 governorships had Palestinian governors. "I represent a constituency of almost one million, but it’s represented by only four deputies," said Tayseer Fityani, one of four MPs representing Palestinians in the capital. "If there were fair representation, Amman would be represented by at least 20 deputies." "Some Transjordanians fear that if the electoral law is reformed, Jordan may end up becoming Palestine," said Hilterman. "Giving the vote more fairly to all would likely lead to electoral victories for forces that would seek to upend the regime’s policies in neighbouring Palestine and Iraq." In a November 2005 report, the ICG has recommended that the "government draft a new electoral law providing a more accurate popular representation." Pro-government assembly In November 2001, hopes of a more balanced political system were dashed when King Abdullah postponed parliamentary elections after a period of civil unrest. The delay until July 2003 was due to concerns about a possible Palestinian uprising in protest at the Israeli occupation next door, as well as ongoing tensions between Palestinians and Jordanians. In the political vacuum left after the dissolution of the assembly, the government enacted temporary measures that placed tough curbs on civil liberties, rights activists said. "In this period, the government passed over 220 temporary laws which were unconstitutional, such as banning public meetings, and that led to a very serious setback for public liberties," said independent opposition deputy Abdul Rahim Malhas. "It also created an atmosphere that emboldened the authorities to override the constitution." When the 2003 elections finally took place, the Islamist opposition re-emerged as a political force for the first time in six years, ending a boycott that had lasted since the previous, 1997 poll. Despite the return of the Islamists, however, the political system has remained largely in the hands of an old-guard of conservative politicians from tribes inhabiting the area east of the Jordan River, say analysts. This has had the effect of rendering "a conservative and pliant parliament that by and large has done the regime’s bidding," said Hilterman. Conservatives dominate the army, security forces and state bureaucracy which holds extensive power and which liberal reformers blame for frustrating the monarch in his attempts to move faster on reform promises. Politicians say the intelligence agency, or mukhabarat, has also held the king back from further political reforms on the grounds that such changes would encourage the rise of Muslim radicals, who feed off popular discontent about government failures to raise living conditions, as well as the issue of the US occupation of Iraq. But the Islamist-led opposition maintains that undercutting radicalism and defusing resentment can only be achieved by introducing wider political freedoms. The Islamists are in favour of democracy, but the level of their commitment has to be tested once they are in power, according to Hilterman. "With democracy they often mean little more than elections; these will not be sufficient to establish a democratic system of government." Civil liberties Meanwhile, lawyers and rights activists blame the clamp-down on human rights on the already pervasive influence of the mukhabarat in public life. "The security forces have a large role in curbing public liberties and in violating human rights by intervening in all aspects of public life," said Maysra Malass, head of the Public Liberties Committee at the Association of Professional Unions. According to international human rights groups, Jordan – a US ally - has used the global "war on terror" to clamp down on dissidents and curb civil rights. "Jordan’s General Intelligence Department, prisons and ordinary police stations all have known records of abuse," said Joe Stork, deputy head of the Middle East division at US-based Human Rights Watch. With ongoing conflict across the Kingdom’s borders in Iraq and the West Bank, authorities fear that Islamist groups could step up a campaign to incite attacks and whip up anti-US sentiment. In recent years, hundreds of Islamist and leftist activists who were critical of US policies have been arrested under vague defamation laws which make it a crime to insult the government. According to local and international rights activists, the legislation has also been employed to suppress dissent and break up political gatherings in universities and mosques. In early 2005, the authorities also hardened their stance against professional unions by pushing for a law banning them from political activity. The unions were considered long-time bastions of dissent and opposition to the Kingdom’s pro-western policies. “National Agenda” King Abdullah set up a royal committee in 2005 to lay down a blue-print for reform. The "National Agenda" would lead the country into an era of greater press freedom, giving it an independent judiciary, political pluralism and a modern society, the king promised. But Abdullah stayed on the sidelines when the National Agenda committee failed to reach a consensus on a new voting system. The monarch was then forced to sack reformist Prime Minister Adnan Badran in November, after a powerful coalition of 49 loyalists in the 110-member assembly accused Badran’s team of bowing to a US reform agenda. Women’s rights On the social front, discrimination against women remains a problem in Jordan, although the status of women has improved significantly, according to US-based watchdog Freedom House Women have gained equal rights with men with respect to entitlements to education, political participation and employment. However, they continue to be denied equal nationality and citizenship rights, and to face discrimination in family laws and in government pensions and social security benefits, according to US-based watchdog, Freedom House.