MPs Get A Royal Pardon

It was a long and epic story…

It started with four MPs from the Islamic Action Front party glorifying Zarqawi at his funeral a few months ago. This was followed by several thousand people protesting, which was followed by the MPs being detained, which was followed by them getting a harsh jail sentence, which was followed by a reduced sentence, which was followed by a fairly short boycott by the IAF during the latest parliament session and finally, last but not least, concluded with the expected Royal pardon.

Don’t you love happy endings?


  • So pathetic….. I would suggest canceling the judicial branch and using royal decrees instead.
    nice show by the government and the IAF for the last X months.

  • Habchawi: well royal decrees are constitutionally part of all branches of governance, as is say, a veto, in a more democratic system. these people got a trial. that being said, I agree it was a good show and that was obvious from the get go. the objective was not to jail these specific people but rather to use them to set a social example that condoning terrorism in a post 11/9 Jordan will not be tolerated. It was probably also a signal to the IAF to pick a position and to firmly stand by it.

  • It was a mistake to even arrest the MPs. Sure what they said was outragous and utterly cruel and insensative, but this is hypocritical of the govt. The govt does things that offend the majority of jordanians all the time, including but not limited to the cozy relationship with israel which is a slap in the face for most jordanians that is harder to swallow or rationalize in nationalistic terms, even as lebanese and palestinian blood was being spelt. So lets cut the crap and stop the upmanship. Fact is, it’s hard to tell if anyone really cares about jordan and jordanians at the official level. slogans are cheap. last time i went to the bank to cash a slogan, the cashier stared at me, until i told him I was kidding and asked to make a withdrawal.

  • Nas,
    Veto in more democratic systems is used to block the operation of laws or legislations passed by the lawmakers and there is an increasing reluctance on the part of countries to exercise their veto powers, except in some controversial issues in the country. Furthermore, veto power is limited; and it may be overridden by different ways in different systems. And so far I havenâ??t heard of a veto used to undermine a court decision. So, comparing the royal decrees in jordan to a veto is too much….

  • Well, I’ll just point out that in the US, elected excutive officials (governors and president) DO have the power to pardon or commute sentences imposed by the courts.

    And it’s often used in particularly sensitive situations… President Ford pardoned former President Nixon after the latter resigned — presumably in order to prevent America from having to sit through a drawn out trial of a former president, which would have brought faith in government to an all-time low. (cynics say it was to prevent Nixon’s secrets from coming out in court)

    More recently, the outgoing governor of Illinois commuted the sentences of all 100-some inmates who were scheduled for execution — he said he had become opposed to the death penalty because he had seen too many mistakes made, and he could not allow the executions to go forward without certainty…

    So,you can say the US is a democratic system or not, but there has always been a precedent for pardons — usually for political, rather than legal reasons

  • Habchawi, sorry, wrong use of the word on my part. i actually meant the ability for officials to commute a sentence, to offer amnesty or reprives, etc. it’s not different from a royal pardon, just a different name.

  • I donâ??t think that the IAF issue is not as controversial as the death penalty in the USA or prosecuting a former president of a state. And usually convicts have to admit guilt before being pardoned; and I can give far more examples were presidents and/or governors refused to pardon ex-convicts to preserve the court decisions.
    I might understand a royal decree in that sense. However, in Jordan it’s usually used as tool to indebt people to the government by playing the favors gameâ?¦â?¦.and this is my problem.

  • Habchawi, i agree the iaf issue is not as controversial but not every presidential pardon has involved the death penalty and not every case has involved a display of remorse. and yes of course it’s political. the same governors who seek to “uphold” the court’s decision do so for political capital as well.

    as for making people in debt to the government and/or king. well i won’t deny its one possibility but i can’t recall many cases where that’s happened and in spite of pardons i doubt the iaf will ever be in debted to the government for anything. but that’s just my opinion.

Your Two Piasters: