The Royal pardon: How should we read it?

The widespread understanding of the King Abdullah’s gesture towards 16 detainees implicated in the sedition case is true and generally accurate. Simply put, the King took the approach of tolerance, a signature of his Hashemite heritage and a unique Jordanian model in dealing with those who targeted the Throne and constitutional constants. اضافة اعلان

Due to the sensitivity of the case, however, it can be said that the King’s step was a continuation of a previous step he took, when he dealt with the case within the family, entrusting Prince Hassan bin Talal with the task. The effort ended with a solution that saw Prince Hamzah sign a letter in which he vowed allegiance to the King and the Crown Prince and respect of the values of the Hashemite Family.

This was a sincere commitment on the part of His Majesty to what he mentioned in the first letter to the public, which followed the outbreak of the case. In this letter, he stressed that “there is no difference between my responsibility towards my small and larger families,” and that “my foremost responsibility is serving Jordan and safeguarding its people, Constitution, and laws.”

In that historic letter, which carried important indications for those who could read between the lines, His Majesty said that “the next steps will be rooted in the criterion that defines all our decisions — the nation’s interest and the interest of our loyal people.”

In the end, the King deemed it would be in best to deal with case with rationality and wisdom, and in a way that combines the legal track and the Hashemite tolerance.

After concerned authorities wrapped up the probe, and the case was referred to the public prosecution at the State Security Court, the full details of the case and the role of each of the accused in the plot became clear. A source at the public prosecution department described the suspects’ roles as complicated and distinctive, and they are so, indeed.   

For the same considerations taken when the Royal pardon was decided, it was necessary to exclude two primary suspects from the amnesty because their roles were different from those of the rest of the accused. The King personally set the criteria governing his gesture, limited the pardon to those who were misled or made mistakes and followed the sedition attempt.

In the first meeting with local columnists and journalists, Prime Minister Bisher Khasawneh gave an off-the-record presentation detailing the chronologies of the case from the beginning.

Silence prevailed when attendees listened to bitter and painful facts about what was being concocted, and the role of the main defendants.  

And even before this detailed presentation by the premier, the King had stressed at a meeting with political figures that had the crisis not been nipped in the bud, it could have dragged the country into difficult directions.  

The following developments, outside the judicial probe context, also revealed very interesting information carried by media outlets, reporting that the case was accompanied by social media campaigns orchestrated by external parties and states. The campaign involved tens of thousands of fake accounts on social media, which were monitored and their sources identified. It was led by trolls seeking to fan the fire in Jordan?

Does that mean there are external parties involved? Evidence suggests that, but it is unlikely to hear it during the court hearings.

Read more Opinions.