Parliamentary brawl in Jordan: Can voters’ faith be restored?

Increasingly, Jordanians say they think little of Parliament, if they think of it at all.

Once revered as the “people’s house,” Parliament is now being dismissed by some as a “house of embarrassment.”

A reminder why was a mass brawl last week during a debate over constitutional amendments that featured punches, body slams, headlocks, and a house speaker ordering lawmakers to “shut up!” It gave another black eye to an institution seen as less representative, or relevant, than in the past.

Two decades of gerrymandering and electoral engineering by governments eager to suppress dissent have filled the legislature with MPs hand-picked for loyalty but lacking ideology or policies.

“Our Parliament is a sideshow; we don’t hear from them when it matters, and when we do hear from them, we wished we hadn’t,” says Bassam, a former military officer who asked that his full name not be used. “Our representatives don’t represent anyone but themselves.”

With faith in democracy and its institutions being tested around the world, and authoritarians flexing their own political muscles, voters in Jordan say they have given up on an institution that simply rubber-stamps legislation submitted by the royally appointed government.

“We vote for people to stand up to government policies, but they let us down each time,” says Bassam. “They only do what the government wants.”

Some say MPs publicly rail against unpopular government proposals, such as tax hikes, but then just fall in line.

“Ninety-nine MPs scream and shout they are against a law, but one telephone call later and they all vote in favor of it the very next day,” says Abdullah Youssef, a clerk in Amman.

Says Oraib Rantawi, director of the Amman-based Al Quds Center for Political Studies: “Jordan today is one of the only countries in the world where people are happy when the king dissolves Parliament.”

Vote of no-confidence

A royal committee is rushing reforms through Parliament it says can rebuild Jordanians’ trust in the system and regain their faith in the elected body.

Among the changes are steps to restore national parties’ representation and increase roles of women and young people in party politics.

But those moves, which coincide with others that reduce Parliament’s authority, may do little to restore the body’s stature.

In an October public opinion survey by the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan, 15% of Jordanians expressed confidence in Parliament, making it the least-trusted institution in the kingdom, behind the army (91%), judiciary (53%), media (39%), unions (36%), and the government (33%).

In October 2020 parliamentary elections, 29% of eligible voters cast a ballot – the lowest participation rate ever in a Jordanian legislative election.

Mr. Rantawi says the plunge in support “comes after attempts by successive governments to discredit Parliament in the minds of the people and reduce Parliament’s role in the political process.”

It is an accusation repeated by MPs.

“In Jordan, Parliament is the people’s power. The only way to take away people’s power is to convince them that they no longer have it,” says Saleh Armouti, an opposition MP aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islah coalition. “This is why the government sabotages Parliament – to make it appear incapable of bettering people’s lives.”

Islamist “scare”

The directly elected body was celebrated by Jordanians when it was reintroduced after a 22-year absence in 1989 by King Hussein, who lifted martial law in the face of mass protests over rising prices.

The 1989 elections saw a 54% turnout. The Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamist party snagged 22 out of the then-80 seats in the legislature, creating the largest bloc.

In 1993, faced with the rising influence of the Brotherhood and opposition voices as Jordan neared a peace treaty with Israel, the government amended the elections law to minimize the presence of outspoken parties.

With each subsequent election, the government altered the system further to favor independent, tribal, and regional candidates over political parties.

For the past two decades, these laws combined with gerrymandering, rampant vote-buying, and alleged interference by security services to fill Parliament with pro-regime loyalists and others without party affiliation, political ideology, or policy proposals.

Only a dozen independents and opposition figures reached Parliament each election.

“Money, tribalism, special interests, and the interference of state agencies have created bad Parliaments that do not represent Jordanians’ dreams, wishes, and aspirations or even reflect their own ideas and values,” says Rula al-Hroub, an MP from 2013 to 2016 and secretary-general of the secular, center-left Stronger Jordan Party.

With the influx of independent candidates, Parliament became dominated by performance politics.

Unable to vote against or defeat government motions, many MPs instead took to shouting and threatening violence in theatrical forms of aggression that made them appear tough to their constituents – without the hard work of legislating policy.  

But in recent years, even the performance art has lost its political edge.

The brawl last week, which erupted during a discussion to add “Jordanian women” to the constitution’s preamble protecting individuals’ rights, was over a perceived personal slight between MPs.

“The vast majority of MPs come in as individuals, so they believe in their own egos, their sub-identities, their region, and their tribe. They have no political identity or agenda by which to organize their work,” says Amer Bani Amer, director of Rased, an election- and Parliament-monitoring nongovernmental organization.  

“They are not accepting of an open dialogue, and this is a reflection of broader trends in society.”

Repairing the social contract

The loss of faith in Parliament comes at a time of acute economic hardship and social unrest in the kingdom.

The unemployment rate hovers around 28%. Jordanians’ trust in one another is at an all-time low.

Last summer, weeks after an alleged coup plot involving his half brother, King Abdullah formed a committee of politicians and experts across the political spectrum to help reboot and modernize the country’s political system “for a new and critical phase.”

The royal committee zeroed in on saving Parliament as key to repairing the social contract.

The committee’s reforms include reserving 30% of Parliaments’ seats for political parties at the national level, to be raised incrementally to 60% of seats over successive elections.

Others include requiring that political parties’ membership be at least 20% women and 20% below the age of 35, and lowering the minimum age for MPs to 25.

But with these changes have also come a host of constitutional amendments that activists and legal experts say have gutted Parliament’s powers, and broadened the king’s powers.

They include removal of an article requiring the prime minister to resign following the dissolution of Parliament – opening the door for king-appointed governments to govern in the absence of Parliament – and another measure granting the king the authority to appoint and remove senior officials and judges.

The amendments also formed a new body, the National Security Council, hand-picked by the king, which would exert authority over foreign policy and security outside parliamentary oversight.

What is left for parties?

These amendments have been rushed through Parliament this week with little discussion.

“They have stripped Parliament of all its authority,” says Ms. Al-Hroub, the former MP. “As a political party, why should I run in the next elections? What is even left for political parties?”

Many Jordanians are nonplussed by the amendments, if they have heard of them.

“No changes they make to Parliament, the law, or constitution will change the fact that they don’t want us to have a say in economic policy at home or foreign policy abroad,” says Zayd, a 30-something plumber.

“If I see a political party that represents my demands for a fair economy, cracking down on corruption, and ends all cooperation with Israel, I would vote for them,” says Rawwan, a university graduate. “But I doubt that any political party will be allowed to say what Jordanians actually think.”

For now, the brawls, near and far, give some pause.

“If American political supporters can ransack the Capitol and destroy Congress, what hope do we have for our MPs here in Jordan?” says Mohammed Hamzah, a taxi driver.

Not all Jordanians are pessimistic, however.

Ahmed, an engineering student paying for university by waiting tables at a downtown Amman restaurant, says reforms encouraging youth to enter politics could pave the way for positive change.

“If we can have more youth in Parliament and streamline my generation’s vision with the experience of veteran MPs, we can do a lot of good for our country,” says Ahmed, who doesn’t rule out running for office one day. 

“We have many things to contribute to better our country. All we need is the opportunity.”