Jordan Times
Thursday, November 9, 2006
Post 11/9, Jordanians more united, security still
top priority, but at what price?
Government reiterates security, democratisation, reform go
hand-in-hand
AMMAN — On this date last year three lethal terrorist attacks rocked
Jordan, a country known for its safety and stability in the midst of an increasingly volatile neighbourhood.
There have been changes since.
Security, always a top priority, began to more publicly override all other issues. Jordanians were made more
aware of lurking dangers, from sleeper cells to groups possibly planning other deadly attacks. The realisation that the Kingdom was as vulnerable to suicide bombers as are other countries united the government, the people and the security apparatus in the pledge to protect the country against any attempts at undermining its stability.
“Jordan marks the first anniversary of the tragic bombings in Amman with a deep sense of sadness in remembering the
innocent lives that were lost that day, but also with a renewed determination to fight terror and terrorists wherever or whoever they are,” Government Spokesperson Nasser Judeh said Wednesday.
“The tragic events of 11/9 bombings united Jordanians in their rejection of terror and abhorrence for all those who perpetrate or support terror regardless of their origins or beliefs,” he told The Jordan Times.
But safety comes at a price, observers say.
“The bombings increased people’s sense of the urgent need for security, to a point where measures were exaggerated and became the top priority,” said Al Arab Al Yawm’s columnist Fahd Khitan. Khitan said the people’s need to feel safe following the attacks pushed likewise important rights such as public freedoms and liberties to the back row.
Tight security measures were put in effect immediately after the bombings. The country entered a new phase of combating terrorism. Security cameras, extra guards, metal detectors and vehicle inspection devices were used all over the capital, particularly at hotels — the target of the 2005 bombings — and government buildings. Citizens themselves became more aware of the necessity for beefed-up security and helped by complying with the new measures. The country’s security forces heightened efforts to track down possible terrorists, zeroing in on enemy number one: Abu Mussab Zarqawi, the mastermind of the triple bombings.
Zarqawi was killed in a massive US air strike north of Baghdad in June. Jordanian officials said then that the country’s security services were part of the joint Iraqi-multinational forces’ effort to try to locate Zarqawi.
But the authorities believed that augmented security needed to be backed up by new legislation that would legitimise extraordinary measures. On August 27, Parliament endorsed a controversial anti-terrorism bill designed to do just that.
The Anti-Terror Law, which allows indefinite detention of suspects, triggered concerns among local and international human rights activists that it would infringe on public freedoms. On the heels of that bill came the contentious Khutba Law, which regulates sermons, preaching and clerical guidance and teaching in the country’s mosques. The Khutba Law, endorsed after a two-hour debate in Parliament, was also perceived by activists and Islamists as a legal tool to control religious lectures and ensure any manner of condoning terrorism through the mosques would be punishable.
Still, most criticism centred on the Anti-Terror Law.
Experts warned that the legislation would be invoked by the government to enforce “excessive” security measures, which in turn would add to people’s sense of insecurity.
“A tight security grip over the country may not necessarily bring about the desired goal of greater safety. On the contrary, it could have the opposite impact on people,” said lawyer and head of the Arab Organisation for Human Rights, Hani Dahleh.
Dahleh told The Jordan Times earlier that the law — a preventive piece of legislation — was in itself a “terrorist document” because it contained articles that deprive citizens of the right to free thought and speech. He also said the law penalises people on the basis of “suspicion” rather than on proven evidence.
The New York-based Amnesty International issued a statement Wednesday calling on the government to repeal the Anti-Terror Law or amend it to bring it in line with Jordan’s obligations under international legal instruments and conventions. The organisation also reiterated previous calls for the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture, which allows for independent monitoring of all places of detention.
The law criminalises acts of terror, including direct or indirect relations with terrorist organisations inside or outside the country; financing, interacting with or recruiting for any terrorist group; and possessing, making, or transporting any material that can be used to produce chemical weapons. Security services are authorised to take measures against those believed to support terror ideas, incite attacks or express sympathy for suicide bombers. The law allows for the detention of suspects without charge or trial for indefinite periods of time. It also grants military courts sole jurisdiction over terrorism cases, and allows officials to conduct surveillance of terrorism suspects and prevent suspects from leaving the country.
The Islamic Action Front, the country’s leading opposition party, criticised the law as politically influenced by Western countries, namely the US. Its members said it was designed to stifle Jordan’s reform movement and encourage the establishment “of a police state”.
In endorsing the anti-terror bill, Jordan has become the first Arab country to implement such legislation and join the ranks of several Western countries, including the US, Canada, the UK and Australia.
But authorities maintain the legislation was necessary to close current loopholes in existing laws and to deal with increased security threats — particularly those posed by Islamist terror groups like Al Qaeda. The laws on the books penalise a crime after it happens, while the new legislation is meant to nip crimes in the planning stage, Judeh said. He said security was not going to be achieved at the expense of democratisation and reform, but rather, all these processes go hand-in-hand.
But opponents of the law say that policy is flawed. They maintain that restrictive laws cannot prevent terror-related attacks. They cite the September 4 shooting of foreign tourists in Amman by a lone gunman, which resulted in the death of a British citizen, as an example of the inability to stop a crime or control growing public frustration over regional developments. The gunman who shot at tourists at the Roman Amphitheatre was not linked to Al Qaeda but was reported to have acted out of anger over the Israeli war on Lebanon this past summer and out of revenge for the death of his brothers in south Lebanon during the 1982 Israeli invasion of the Arab country.
Some analysts also hinted that the law would be used as a legal pretext to crack down on critics of official policies and contain growing public resentment at US strategies in the region, especially in Iraq, as well as the mounting frustration with the moribund peace process and Israel’s continuous onslaught and massacres against Palestinian civilians.
These experts warn that curbing guaranteed rights to free expression and people’s inability to express their increased frustrations with regional developments for fear of being suspected of terrorism could have a highly negative effect and could backfire by encouraging normally peaceful groups to embrace and condone extremism.
“I believe that Jordan succeeded in deducing security lessons from the bombings and is now more capable and equipped to tackle terrorism and detect terrorists,” said Khitan. But, he added: “I wish the same was done on the political level.”
The columnist said the government has fallen behind in terms of tackling political issues and moving ahead with the democratisation process, which he believes would help ease the “public state of anger and dismay related to the worsening regional conditions”.
Social measures and a comprehensive political reform process including new elections, political parties and public gatherings laws, should be enacted in order to completely eradicate the roots or reasons for terrorist acts, he said.
Former deputy prime minister and Royal Court official Marwan Muasher agreed. He said terror should be tackled through short- and long-term policies.
In the short-term, necessary security measures and legislation must be applied, he said. “But I think we need to pay attention to long-term policies. Not security but rather those related to educational and value systems,” Muasher said.
He said many people still consider Zarqawi a fighter and not a terrorist, adding that such an issue should be addressed through a proactive educational system that accepts diversity and doesn’t teach children that uniformity on all issues is a good value.
Muasher called for opening up the system and encouraging greater democracy and a wider base of participation in decision making, saying, “a lot of people who don’t want change to happen used the bombings as an excuse to not open up the system. I think it is the opposite”.