The National Society for Human Rights said that the Jordanian arena is witnessing a state of shock as a result of the negative government performance, due to the rapid and sudden introduction of the draft law amending the Cybercrime Law.

The association added in a statement issued by it that the government involved the project in an unilateral manner without a national or professional dialogue and in the absence of community or national partnership, which is rejected by the national group.

She pointed out that the content of the draft law amending the Cybercrime Law was characterized by expanding the circle of criminalization to include everything that is permissible and confiscating freedom of opinion and expression, with loose texts that violate the standards and principles of drafting legislation, and with severe penalties that deprive freedom or financial penalties.

The following is the text of the statement:

Statement of the National Society for Human Rights about

Draft law amending the Cybercrime Law

Wrong path and opposite direction in method, content and destination

The Jordanian human rights, legal, political, media and popular arena is witnessing a state of shock and surprise as a result of the government’s negative performance, in the rapid and sudden introduction of the draft law amending the Cybercrime Law and throwing it into the current session of the Jordanian Parliament. Professional, popular and political reactions to this project have escalated for several reasons and supports, including:

1. Method and method: The Jordanian government has introduced this draft law in an unilateral manner and manner without national and/or professional dialogue and in the absence of community or national partnership, which is rejected by the national group on the one hand, and on the other hand, it contradicts the Jordanian official allegations of partnership and dialogue and reveals the extent of the credibility of these allegations.

2. Content and content: The national, societal and professional shock and astonishment increases when viewing the content of the draft law amending the Cybercrime Law, which was characterized by the expansion of the criminalization circle to include everything that is permissible and the confiscation of freedom of opinion and expression and with loose texts that violate the standards and principles of drafting legislation and with severe penalties that deprive freedom or financial penalties, which He indicates and affirms the adoption of the approach of absolute power, which is necessarily an absolute corruption and even a departure from the rules and legal principles governing the preparation of legislation in terms of the absence of definition of crime and its wide scope, contrary to the rule of no crime or punishment except by text and assigning the powers to move a personal right complaint to the official authorities.

3. The intent and objectives of the Jordanian government of the draft law: It is completely clear from the manner and method of including this draft law, as well as its content and the content of its articles, that the clear and overriding intent behind this expansion of the circle of criminalization and loose texts and the absence of a legal definition of the terms contained in it and the harsh and exaggerated penalties is to immunize the official authorities and those in charge It and the public employee of criticism and societal and media censorship (the fourth estate) and at the same time criminalizing and even intimidating anyone who tempts himself to practice freedom of opinion, expression and criticism with harsh, liberty and financial penalties that make whoever thinks of his concern for his country and his criticism of the corrupt or arbitrary employee imprisoned and in debt for all eternity, unlike The national judicial and legal path in adopting the concept of restorative justice and limiting the penalty of imprisonment in criminal, civil and executive terms is really suspicious!

4. The wrong path and the opposite direction: The draft law amending the Cybercrime Law contradicts and reflects the government’s stated trend of political modernization, the system of releasing public freedoms, framing partisan work, and forming partisan governments, as the content of the law and its articles that focus on broad penalties that go beyond the purpose of public and private deterrence and the expansion of the criminalization circle to include all What is permissible and with loose texts that constitute a legislative trend that is opposite to political reform and modernization and leads to the eradication of public rights and freedoms, not political modernization.

5. Correctness: In terms of methodology, the legislation regulating the media should be unified in one law, and then the punitive legislation should be unified in one law, which is the penal law. We do not need the cybercrime law, as the penal law contains all types of crimes, and the difference in the means of committing the crime does not change the content of the text of the origin of the criminal act. Amending the text, if necessary, with a legislative officer, which is defining the crime in a clear and specific formulation and with restrictive and not absolute texts, and not prejudice public rights and freedoms, and that the legislation does not constitute a restriction or confiscation of all that, and that the legislation in its texts does not go beyond the purpose of deterrence to the goal of eliminating rights and freedoms and immunizing official authorities A public servant of criticism and statement of corruption, failure and biases.

6. Essential remedy: After all of that, we say that criminalization should not in any way affect any criticism, written or published material in any way, or comment, whether it was issued by a journalist or a citizen, if it was addressed to the official authorities or one of those in charge of them and on the occasion of his work. Or its signatory, i.e. persons of public law, public officials and those in their status, and the case of criminalization is present and with clear texts and consistent with the Penal Code and the principles of preparing and drafting legislation and not exceeding the purpose of public and private deterrence to purposes and objectives that violate the provisions of the Constitution and international agreements if the purpose of the press or published material is persons of private law Individuals, companies, parties, associations, families, and unions. This perception is applicable in the countries of the civilized world. The purpose of all of this is to allow and open the wide scope for the people, their institutions, and their individuals to monitor the official authority, reveal its corruption, bias, and failure, leading to law enforcement and accountability for abuse of power or breach of the duties of the public office for that. For this purpose, the case of criminalization has been lifted and completely excluded, as long as what is meant is the official authorities and those in charge of them and on the occasion of their work.

7. The compulsory requirement and national duty / requires the withdrawal of the draft law amending the Cybercrime Law by the Jordanian government, and the Jordanian Parliament’s endeavor to repeat the rejection of the draft law as it did previously, and that the Jordanian Parliament, which is the legislative authority representing the general Jordanian people, not appear to respond to government pressures, and we are at the gates Parliamentary elections. In addition, we propose holding a national dialogue that regulates the media and its written and electronic means in a way that guarantees the preservation of public rights and freedoms, activates oversight of the executive authority, and at the same time protects the personal lives of individuals, money, data, and financial and personal transactions, and that legislation is not exploited contrary to its purposes in deterring other purposes to assassinate rights and freedoms. and pounce on popular control tools.

8. The final note: Cyberspace has become influential in countries and societies, and the most explicit and clear indication is the impossibility of limiting or overthrowing it, as it is a global, widespread and rapid issue that exceeds the capabilities of any government in the world. Returning to before martial law in the legislative situation is a very dangerous matter and its repercussions are severe. .

National Society for Human Rights

Amman / 29 Dhu al-Hijjah 1444 AH

Corresponding to July 18, 2023 AD