Political Life Under Threat: The Main Risks of Jordan’s Cybercrime Law

“Immunity for the corrupt” — these were the most prominent words voiced by Jordanians expressing their anger toward the Jordanian Parliament’s approval of amendments to the Cybercrime Law on July 27, 2023.

The controversial law gained parliamentary consent after modifications by the legal committee, which considered it a protective measure for society rather than criminalizing it.

The law, deemed by the public as a return to the era of “customary judgments” and an attempt to control social media by the state, was passed after a parliamentary proposal to reject the law and send it back to the government failed.

 

Cybercrimes

The draft legislation seeks to classify the utilization of the Internet by individuals, including journalists, for spreading “inaccurate information,” engaging in acts of “slander” (Article 15), or inflicting harm to “reputation” (Article 16) or “national cohesion” (Article 17), as criminal offenses. The potential sanctions encompass fines spanning from 20,000 to 50,000 Jordanian dinars (equivalent to 25,000 to 63,000 euros) and imprisonment for up to three years.

Prosecution for these crimes does not require a complaint if directed at state authorities, official bodies, or public servants while performing their duties.

The Parliament debated the amendments in a public session and, in some cases, reduced penalties by half compared to the original draft before approving it by a majority.

Critics argue that the law will curtail access to information, penalize anti-government discourse, and potentially be used against political opposition.

On the other hand, proponents of the Cybercrime Law argue that it aligns with international standards and provisions of the Jordanian Constitution. The law aims to avoid violations of personal life and disruptions to civil peace while considering the criteria of freedom of expression.

According to the constitution, after passing in the Lower House, the bill requires approval from the Senate and royal endorsement before being published in the official gazette for enforcement.

The rationale behind the proposed law includes the swift evolution of information technology, necessitating the criminalization of certain cyber acts and the punishment of offenders to combat cybercrimes, as per the official Jordan News Agency (Petra).

The law also seeks to provide protection for public and private rights and freedoms from infringements, such as blackmail, cyber fraud, incitement to violence, hate speech, disparaging religions, violating private life, attacking electronic payment methods, banking services, and safeguarding critical infrastructure.

The Prime Minister, Bisher Khasawneh, stated during the law’s discussion session that “the government does not present anything that compromises or diminishes the constitution,” which guarantees freedom of expression.

 

‘Repressive Law’

Despite this, the amendments quickly sparked extensive debates and kindled fervor among the Jordanian public, human rights, and journalistic circles. Activists, journalists, and rights organizations voiced concerns that the law curtails freedom of expression.

Fourteen rights organizations, including Access Now and Human Rights Watch, criticized the law, asserting that it threatens digital rights, freedom of expression, and the right to access information.

They believed that the law would ultimately fail to achieve the Jordanian government’s stated goals of addressing deception, hate speech, and online defamation, describing it as having a repressive, ambiguous, and intricate nature.

These organizations called on lawmakers to consult with civil society organizations to explore alternative ways that respect rights and address legitimate concerns regarding hate speech and misleading information.

Hundreds of politicians and journalists also signed a statement demanding the withdrawal of the draft law, which they deemed the most threatening to public and press freedoms, and organized protest rallies in the capital, Amman.

The Jordanian public also made their voice heard regarding the law. On July 29, 2023, hundreds of Jordanians participated in a protest march that began at the Grand Husseini Mosque in downtown Amman.

They called for the withdrawal of the bill, which they see as a “restriction of freedoms” and a “gagging of voices.”

Speakers at the march, including party leaders and representatives from popular coordination committees, appealed to Jordan’s King Abdullah II to “intervene” and prevent the passage of this law, which they described as “regressive.”

During the protest, organized by several parties and popular unions, demonstrators held banners with slogans opposing the draft law, such as “Cybercrime Law… Killing Political Life” and “Cybercrime Law... Mourning for Freedom.”

Protesters chanted slogans rejecting the law, including “Freedom, freedom… no to the security grip.” Speakers emphasized that anti-law activities would continue until the law is overturned.

The 40-article law, addressing the protection of the digital realm and electronic entities from tampering, has garnered criticism for being inconsistent with the framework of political modernization. Critics argue that its vague terminology could lead to numerous issues for Jordanians.

In this context, prominent Jordanian politician and former Minister of Labor, Dr. Ma’en al-Qatamin, perceived the Cybercrime Law as “encouraging secretive behavior, reminiscent of the situation in the 1950s.”

Speaking openly in front of citizens, he stated, “This law aims to abort the political process, and the most troubling is Article 25, which holds an individual responsible even for comments posted on his accounts.”

In a recorded statement on July 23, 2023, he continued, “We stand at a real crossroads that affects every Jordanian citizen, as not a single family member remains immune to potential application on social media platforms. Therefore, this law must be avoided to prevent imprisonment and fines for a mere post or comment.”

Critics of this law are particularly concerned about its criminalization of freedom of expression. The vague terms it employs could lead to accusations of spreading false information and imprisonment based solely on one’s views differing from the government’s stance.

 

Threat to Freedom of Opinion

Some Jordanian lawmakers also believe that the media landscape in Jordan is threatened following the approval of the Cybercrime Law.

Jordanian MP Yanal Fraihat stated in a press interview in front of the Parliament, “Restrictions on journalistic work, journalists, and media personnel will ensue, and prisons will be filled with journalists and citizens expressing their opinions. Thus, the law is seen as an attempt to regress Jordan in terms of media freedoms.”

In this context, Rawan Jayousi, a colleague at the International Center for Journalists and the founder of MADRAJ, an initiative for digital media innovation, asserted that the current form of this law contradicts the vision of reform and undermines democracy in a country that aims to implement it and aspires for fair political reform.

She further added in statements made on July 30, 2023, “Our institution believes that the current version of the law indicates negative repercussions on the current and future state of innovative digital media in Jordan.

“It may lead to significant reluctance in pioneering digital media projects due to the excessive penalties included, without considering the nature of journalistic and media work, which may lead to unintentional errors or differing perspectives in style and presentation.”

It is noteworthy that the organization Reporters Without Borders called on the Jordanian Parliament to reject the stringent Cybercrime Law, backed by the government, which could negatively affect the work of journalists and limit their freedom in reporting news.

Jonathan Dagher, the head of the Middle East office at Reporters Without Borders, stated in a report released on July 21, 2023, “This bill is symptomatic of the serious decline in press freedom in Jordan. With its imprecise language and punitive approach, it allows prosecutors to exercise tighter control over online media and encourages self-censorship.

“We urge the Jordanian parliament to reject this proposed law, which should be replaced by one that protects the public’s right to be informed and does not threaten press freedom.”

He concluded, “We urge the Jordanian Parliament to reject this proposed law, which should be replaced with legislation that safeguards the public’s right to information and does not threaten press freedom.”