2013
Jordan Parliamentary Elections
27
and habit of voting for individual candidates
Not surprisingly list candidates, but also many other
stakeholders, said the 27 seats accorded to lists, accounting for just 18 percent of seats, was too low.
Opinions differed on whether lists in the future should be restricted to political parties. While most
saw limiting lists exclusively to parties as a necessary step to develop political parties, others thought
parties were too weak and not the best way to mobilize Jordanians.
Political Parties
Due to the strong political pull of Jordan’s tribes, distrust among citizens of political parties in
general and the limited nature of election law changes beneficial to parties, election activities
remained minimal for political parties. Parties which were boycotting the elections told IRI long-
term observers that there had been systematic efforts to weaken political parties in Jordan. For
example, they referenced the ban of parties from 1957 to 1989, and said they believed that joining
parties was still taboo because of governmental pressure. Participation within a party, some added,
could result in the loss of a job or family disapproval. As a result of this stigma, few parties have a
presence in Jordan. The only party that consistently registers with voters is the IAF, which
boycotted the elections. Most parties are loyal to the monarchy, with the IAF and the Communist
Party most closely affiliated with the opposition. While the IAF and
Wasat
, or the Islamic Centrist
Party, have an Islamic ideological leaning, most parties tend to have a secular orientation. The IAF’s
decision to boycott, though, gave an opportunity for other parties to increase their national
presence.
Boycott
Those who boycotted the elections included the IAF-led opposition and the
Herak
. The IAF-led
opposition was strengthened by the inclusion of the National Front for Reform, a movement led by
former-Prime Minister Ahmad Obeidat that had gained popularity since its inception in May 2011.
A small minority of civil society groups, labor unions and political parties joined the boycott
movement as well. For this coalition, the primary problem with the current election law was the
retention of the SNTV system, not the percentage of seats allocated to the national list, although this
was also a concern.
The IAF specifically believed that the SNTV system, coupled with the districting structure, provided
unfair representation for those living in urban settings. Economic problems, representatives of the
party said, could not be solved without proper political representation. The party also did not have
faith in the electoral process, stating that serious violations had occurred during the voter
registration phase and vote buying was widely used to coerce voters during the campaign period.
The IAF maintained that the use of political money, even in conditions of a well-administered
election, delegitimized the integrity of the elections.
The IAF, in coordination with the National Front for Reform and the
Herak
, held two protests in
Amman during in the pre-election period. The first, held in early December, was attended by
approximately 5,000 people; while the second, held on January 18, 2013, had closer to 2,000
participants. Though the first demonstration seemed to increase pressure on the government, the
28
International Republican Institute Poll.
National Priorities, Governance and Political Reform in Jordan
. 17-20 July 2012. p.
43.
