Now that Jordan has
five women ministers in the Cabinet and 10 women lawmakers in the Senate (in
addition to 16 women MPs in the Lower House), should the Kingdom’s female
population expect social justice for all women — including working mothers and
homemakers — at the grassroots level?
اضافة اعلان
Judging from the way the Child Rights Law for the
year 2022 has morphed from an ambitious bill that protects children from abuse
and exploitation to a maimed law that strips mothers of their natural right to
have a say in their children’s education, it is hard to imagine that the
country’s “trickle-down” feminism will actually work without a complementary
bottom-up approach.
Incidentally, the word “feminism” can rub the
conservative factions of society the wrong way. The government has been using
the tamer term of “women empowerment” to celebrate the addition of three more
women to the Khasawneh government, as part of last Thursday’s reshuffle, the
fifth in two years. As a result, government now has a total of five women
ministers (up from two), out of a total of 27 top-tier government officials.
This week, local news outlets also posted a couple
of stories to underscore the fact that women now make up around 15 percent of
the Senate, which was dissolved and then reinstated on Sunday, as Parliament’s
ordinary session is about to convene, as of November 13. This brings the total
number of women representation to 10 out of 65 in the Upper House (up from
six). Notably, the elected Lower House has 16 women lawmakers out of a total of
130.
All things considered, more women in power is not
likely to compensate for a piece of legislation that excludes mothers from
expressing their opinions with regards to their children’s school life, as per
Article 17 of the newly endorsed Child Rights Law.
Women in leadership positions were actually part of
the legislative process that resulted in the unfortunate enactment of this
excessively patriarchal law. Jordan probably needs other measures besides an
increase in women representation in the legislative and executive branches of
government to fix the foundational problems facing its democracy.
Jordan needs a strong, well-structured and well-informed civil society to learn from this experience, in hopes of finding solutions to the discriminatory political structures that prohibit the endorsement of equitable laws that protect women and children from bias and bigotry.
For starters, the civil society has been completely
marginalized throughout the enactment process, in favor of Jordan’s classical
conservative institutions, which extend far beyond the influential Islamist
political parties.
In fact, according to sources, civil society
activists that criticize (and partially defend) the child rights bill came
together in a panic as a reaction to the widespread Islamist-led accusations
that painted the draft law as the brainchild of “foreign agendas”.
This reveals an important observation about the
local political landscape: centrist-to-liberal voices in Jordan are often
unorganized, ad hoc and sporadic, while conservatism (including its most
moderate of shades) is backed by a steep institutional heritage that determines
almost all altitudes on the political scene.
It is only natural for conservative points of view
to win, since they are more organized and definitely more experienced. They are
also fully integrated within the country’s power structures, while women are
often marginalized and routinely mistreated.
Unlike women and their allies, conservative voices
occupy every level of the socio-political order, from the grassroots all the
way up to the higher spheres of the political hierarchy.
Women, on the other hand, are often cosmetically
introduced in the upper echelons of the political structure (often in
leadership positions), but remain gravely disempowered at the grassroots level.
During Parliament’s extraordinary session, which ran
from July to October, Jordan had a total of 24 women in the Cabinet, and both
houses of Parliament. Today, the number is 31. During Parliament’s
extraordinary session, the number of women lawmakers who were directly involved
in the adoption of the Child Rights Law was 17: 12 MPs and five Senators.
As the child rights law faced an onslaught of false
accusations that it veers away from Islamic Sharia to dismantle the nuclear
family, the Lower House joint committee tasked with “fixing” the law received
feedback from two shades of the local socio-political spectrum: the highly
organized conservatives and the hastily assembled centrist liberals.
The committee of 22 MPs, with more than half women
(12 to be exact), decided to incorporate the comments they received from the
conservatives to contain misinformed public objections to the law. The
mixed-gender panel also chose to ignore well-written legal analysis offered by
moderately liberal lawyers and activists who advocated for a balanced law that
empowers both men and women in decisions pertaining to children and their
education.
An empowered civil society that handles advocacy and campaigning professionally is more likely to influence policies and laws affecting social justice, women and children than women leaders working against a strong and institutionalized patriarchal current.
Parliament bowed to pressure from the Iftaa’
Council, which has the right by law to study draft laws and regulations so as
to offer an opinion based on Islamic Sharia. The council demanded an amendment
to Article 17, among other provisions, whereby the word “parents” was
substituted with “wali” (male guardian). Ironically, this provision is about
family participation in school processes and decisions to enhance the
educational experience of children. The law now gives this right to men and
strips it away from women, who are typically the ones most involved in their
children’s school life.
In an alarming sign that civil society might be on
its deathbed, no study has been released so far to analyze the absurd journey
of the Child Rights Law through what could be described as a messy ratification
process marred by the government’s inability to face misinformation and
disinformation campaigns in a professional and effective manner.
Jordan needs a strong, well-structured and
well-informed civil society to learn from this experience, in hopes of finding
solutions to the discriminatory political structures that prohibit the
endorsement of equitable laws that protect women and children from bias and
bigotry.
Unfortunately, civil society organizations have long
been demonized and wrongfully accused of serving as a conduit for
conspiratorial “foreign agendas”. This kind of stigmatizing narrative is
convenient to the local political powers that want to maintain the status quo,
all the while cementing the control of Jordan’s current power structures.
In the long run, top-down women empowerment is
unlikely to be effective without women participation at the grassroots level.
An empowered civil society that handles advocacy and campaigning professionally
is more likely to influence policies and laws affecting social justice, women
and children than women leaders working against a strong and institutionalized
patriarchal current.
Ruba Saqr has reported on
the environment, worked in the public sector as a communications officer, and
served as managing editor of a business magazine, spokesperson for a
humanitarian INGO, and as head of a PR agency.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
