Jordan’s election is taking place against the backdrop of war in Gaza, Israel’s creeping annexation of the West Bank, and a stagnating economy. Although the king is the ultimate decision-maker and holds near absolute authority, parliament serves an important function in not only introducing and passing laws, but also in legitimizing Jordan’s political system, especially during the times of heightened domestic and regional tension.
On the surface, it looks like the king is making a very bold move and is intent on showing his country’s commitment to democracy. A closer look reveals that the dice are somewhat loaded, and the elections will return a parliament friendly to government policies.
It is striking that Jordan’s Independent Elections Commission (IEC) has called for an election at this particular time – with the king’s blessing, of course, though it is not unprecedented. The 2001 election, which coincided with the second intifada, was initially postponed and held instead in 2003, the same year that the US-led war on Iraq began.
Islamist parties stand to benefit from election
Nevertheless, the timing suggests that Islamist parties will benefit most from the election, as they are well positioned to capitalize on widespread public anger towards Israel. They have staged regular protests against Israel’s war on Gaza and during election rallies used the slogan ‘We are all Hamas’.
A poll conducted by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy in November and December 2023 reported that 85 per cent of Jordanians expressed a positive view of Hamas, a major jump compared to the 44 per cent who said the same in 2020. This bodes well for the Islamic Action Front (IAF) – Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood movement – which is not only supportive of Hamas, but also calls for the termination of Jordan’s peace treaty with Israel. Furthermore, in 2023, the Arab Barometer reported that 49 per cent of Jordanians favour increasing the role of religion in politics, showing a notable rise from previous years.
The IAF carries with it a political and social agenda that conflicts with the king’s more moderate and pragmatic stance, particularly regarding relationships with the West and Israel. A stronger presence in parliament, therefore, could embolden Islamist voices. This may lead to more conservative policies that alienate Jordan’s Western allies, which the kingdom depends on for financial support.
New election laws reign in IAF
On the face of it then, it looks as though the government is taking a big risk given that the IAF ought to win more seats in the House of Representatives – a prospect the government has worked against for decades.
However, on closer inspection, it is easy to see that old habits die hard. The new election law and an amendment to it passed in early February this year will limit the success of the IAF at the polls, no matter how popular the party might be. It is not the first time that an election law has been passed to redesign the electoral landscape.
Since 1989, the government has introduced a series of elections laws and political parties’ laws aimed at curtailing the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood. These laws also sought to lessen the influence of tribal MPs in the chamber. The strong showing of Jordan’s tribes in parliament has often meant that they dominate policy discussions and, in many cases, frustrate the king’s reform agenda.
Soon after becoming monarch in 1999, King Abdullah made clear that he wanted to reshape Jordan’s political environment by moving it away from politics based on tribe, ethnicity and Islam and one more based on a Westminster-style of governance comprising political parties proffering left, right and centre platforms.
Women and youth representation
This time around, the new election and political parties’ laws hold some promise for women and youth, but less so for Islamist parties. Over 54 per cent of the population is under 25, so the reforms stand to make parliament more representative, though the government’s working assumption that young people will vote for liberal and secular parties may be flawed.
The laws were designed to increase women and youth participation in the political process and transform political parties from being personality-centric vehicles to being policy-focused organizations.
The law requires political party lists to include at least one woman among the first three candidates and another among the next three. Similarly, it mandates that political party lists must include at least one candidate aged 35 or younger among the first five candidates. Moreover, measures to establish political parties have become more strident and require at least 1,000 founding members, comprising 20 per cent women and another 20 per cent aged between 18 and 35. The law also stipulates that parties must represent at least six of Jordan’s governorates.