Indeed King Hussein I has exercised his constitutional powers to dissolve the lower House in 1976, reconvened the parliament in 1984, remove Prime Minister Rifa’I in 1989 and ordered his new Prime Minister Zaid bin Shakir to prepare for elections. All sources consider the elections on November 8, 1989 as the first democratic elections in Jordan.
In the 1989 elections, one of the few yet major parties to participate was the Muslim Brotherhood movement, Ikhwan. As a strictly religious movement, the Ikhwan seeking to increase its influence in the Arab world and Jordan, debated internally whether to participate in the elections; “while it is true that the Ikhwan had been democratic, it was the national democratic process introduced in 1989 that tested their own democracy.” writes Dr. Tamimi in his article Islam and Democracy, Jordan and the Muslim Brotherhood. Dr. Tamimi continues “Those who argued that Islam and democracy were incompatible had lost. A new Islamic discourse was emerging. In contrast to the discourse of the seventies, democracy was now being spoken of as a mechanism rather than an ideology. It was perceived as a set of tools aimed at preventing of despotism and safeguarding civil liberties and human rights.”
Indeed the elections were conducted and different groups were elected, yet Jordan’s democracy is observed by many within and without with a question. “What Jordan is in reality is a somewhat disguised police state run by the monarchy, the army, and the vast intelligence apparatus. This ‘Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan’ uses a variety of sophisticated tactics to co-opt, neutralize, and repress all serious opposition – political or intellectual.” Writes the Mid-East Realities in its web site article dated 28.7.97.
The response of the Jordanian people to the democratic system implemented since 1989 is filled with reserved interest. Democracy is slowly increasing and western ideologies are slowly finding a place among Jordanian perspectives. Articles published at The Star, Jordan’s political, economic and cultural weekly, report about the rapidly growing support of “freedom of opinion” and “press freedom”. On the other hand, it does not seem as though most Jordanians take great interest in governmental party support. That same source claims that less then two percent of Jordanians belong to any political party. Even with the current democratic state in Jordan, Jordanians still feel that any form of demonstration against the government would result in possible punishment to them and sever damage to their families and associates. “Of course if you’re among the small upper elite that share in this rule and wealth, all is OK. It’s just that for everyone else – especially those who wish to speak up against what is happening and most of all the majority population of Palestinian origins – the infamous secret police, the Muhabarat, is watching and waiting.” claim the editors of Mid-East Realities.
Evaluation of sources
The chapter Jordan in the Encyclopedia Britannica provided clear background information on the recent history and government system of Jordan. Being an organization valuing its objectivity, focusing on presenting facts and trying to evade personal judgment and interpretation, the information provided is accepted to be reliable and trustworthy worldwide. Reading the presented material, its obvious the Britannica attempts and succeeds to take a neutral role striving to stay objective in its documentation and observations. The article refrains from passing judgment on the level or quality of the democracy in place, but rather presents the structure of the government and its constitution. The reader, assumed to be scholars and people from the academics world wide, must then evaluate and interpret the presented facts himself. Hence this source is to be considered as reliable and unbiased.
The myth of Jordanian “democracy” and the case of Rami Khouri is a second relevant source used for collecting evidence on the investigation question. This source is an editorial article from Mid East Realities (MER). Since the author is not specified, the MER organization, which published the article, must be regarded. MER is a pro Palestinian organization dedicated to present the views, philosophy and politics of the Palestinians and Jordanian Palestinians to the western and USA public. MER’s mission is to modify the anti-Palestinian policies of USA. Their web site describes itself as “news, views and analysis that government, lobbies and associated interest groups don’t want you to know”. The evident one-sided articles and publications in the site clearly shows their biased view against all acts of the USA, European and Israeli administrations as well as those groups in the Arab world favorable to the western world and the Mideast peace process. The editorial strongly criticizes and questions the democratic process and the objectivity and real freedom of expression of the press and the public in Jordan. MER, intimately affiliated to the people of Jordan yet being based in USA, enjoys the benefit of freedom of speech on Jordan’s internal affairs without the fear of personal security which most likely would have been the case had they been based in Jordan itself. Therefore even though the declared objectives of MER is to provocatively argue against the western policies, its specific approach to the question of democracy in Jordan can be observed as objective from a western democratic viewpoint.
Analysis
The MSN Encarta Encyclopedia declares that modern Democracy is based on these three principals;
- individual freedom - which entitles citizens to the liberty and responsibility of shaping their own careers and conducting their own affairs and equality before law;
- universal suffrage - right of vote for every adult citizen
- Freedom of expression – implying freedom of speech and of the press.
In modern democracies, supreme authority is exercised for the most part by representatives elected by popular suffrage. In typical constitutional monarchies such as the United Kingdom and Norway, only the legislators are elected, and from their ranks a cabinet and a Prime Minister are chosen. Every Western European monarchy had adopted a constitution, hence a “constitutional monarchy”, limiting the power of the Crown and giving a considerable share of political power to the people through their representatives.
Jordan does not exercise democracy under these terms. It is clear that freedom of expression is not present under the government of the King, otherwise there would not be this fear that MER speaks of. This in turn limits the individual freedom practiced in Jordan. Furthermore, this lack of democracy is also clear when looking at universal suffrage. The universal suffrage only really takes place for the representation of the Lower House. However looking closely one sees that the king can quickly dissolve its presence. The democracy about which the King speaks seems, to this day, only to be a Façade and title the king likes to associate his kingdom to.
Comparing the commonly accepted principals of modern democracy to the government system in Jordan its evident that Jordan does not practice democracy as understood and excised in today’s modern democracies. Contrary to statements of Jordan Kings and ministers, all sources used in this investigation, those considered objective as well as those associated with the government or biased against it, are in consensus that the current system has not yet achieved the status of western democracy.
Clearly the Jordanian public demands further freedom and concrete steps which will transform Jordan to a modern constitutional democratic monarchy. However the police and central government system in place does not allow the Jordanian citizens and their public media to voice their wishes and exercise substantial public pressure for changes. Only organizations and individuals outside of Jordan can and do exercise uncensored pressure on the Jordan king to release some of his powers as further steps towards democracy. Although the Jordanian government is built similarly to the governments in the United States and Europe, consisting of three bodies, the King can solely drive legislative decisions, appoint or dissolve his upper house and ministers and maintains complete central power. Unlike most Kings in the world history, the Jordanian King Hussein I has recognized and valued himself without a trigger of popular revolt of the people, the need to move his country and people towards modern democracy. Yet the current King must take further steps and release his unchallenged power to the elected government in order to properly establish democracy in Jordan. The King must realize, as European history repeatedly proved, that if he does not peacefully implement true modern democracy, eventually his people revolt and forcefully demand their democratic rights.
Conclusion:
Indeed many amendments implemented in the system since Jordan’s first Constitution from 1949 have advanced Jordan substantially towards a democratic state. Voting does take place yet it’s only to the Lower House in the parliament. Unlike many other Arab countries, the right to vote is also given to women, which itself represents a further step towards modern human rights. However, it is clear that the practiced democracy, to this day, is minimal and not modern in comparison to the West and USA. Perhaps, with further continuation of the steps towards democracy, Jordan will become an example of a functioning democratic monarchy within the Middle East.
List of sources
AMMAN, Jordan's democracy stagnant, says poll, Middle East TIMES. Week 38, 2002 (Feb, 2002)
"Democracy," Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2002
http://encarta.msn.com © 1997-2002 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved
Democracy and Human Rights, King Hussein I,
Hanson, Victor D. Democracy in the Middle East, News Corporation Weekly Standard 10/21/2002
“Jordan.” The Britannica Encyclopedia. 1986, Vol 6 (referred to as Source 1)
“Jordan's democracy is still half way” The Star, Jordan’s political, economical and cultural weekly, 22 - Sep – 2002
Shlaim, Avi. The Iron Wall. Israel and the Arab World. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Jan 2001.
Tamimi, Azzam. Ed. Islam and Democracy, Jordan and the Muslim Brotherhood
Presented at Kyoto University, Japan 17 July 1999
“The myth of Jordanian “democracy” and the case of Rami Khouri” Mid-East Realities
(referred to as Source 2)
