This chapter focuses on fostering responsiveness and strengthening citizen and stakeholder participation in Jordan. It concentrates on the opportunities available to citizens and civil society organisations to provide suggestions and feedback on policymaking, service design and delivery, as well as to be meaningfully involved in public decision-making and hold the government accountable for their activities and related outcomes. The chapter begins by reviewing the conditions for meaningful participation, namely the protection of civic freedoms, an enabling environment for civil society and the role of oversight bodies. It then looks at how the government receives inputs, complaints, and grievances from citizens and how accountable the public administration is. Lastly, the chapter identifies existing forms of citizen and stakeholder participation and ways to mainstream more innovative methods to strengthen the state-citizen relationship.
OECD Public Governance Reviews: Jordan
Abstract
By seeking out the views of their citizens and addressing their concerns, governments can ensure that policies and services reflect and respond to the needs of the public. At the same time, actively engaging citizens and civil society organisations (CSOs)1 can support public officials in making informed decisions underpinned by a broad range of perspectives, increasing stakeholders’ buy-in on necessary reforms. Bolstering citizen and stakeholder participation and providing more opportunities for their participation in policymaking and service design and delivery can support governments in pursuing short-, medium- and long-term goals.
The OECD defines citizen and stakeholder participation as “all the ways in which stakeholders (including citizens) can be involved in the policy cycle and in service design and delivery” (OECD, 2017[1]). This refers to all efforts made by public bodies to hear the views, perspectives and inputs from citizens and stakeholders. While formal organisations and individual citizens require different approaches and formats, the OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes outline different ways that both can be involved in public decision-making (Table 3.2) (OECD, 2022[2]). To support countries in this regard, the OECD has developed a “ladder” of citizen and stakeholder participation to expand upon the ways in which all relevant actors can be involved in public decision-making. The 2017 OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (OECD, 2017[1]) defines them as the following:
Information: An initial level of participation characterised by a one-way relationship in which the government produces and delivers information to stakeholders. It covers both on-demand provision of information and “proactive” measures by the government to disseminate information.
Consultation: A more advanced level of participation that entails a two-way relationship in which stakeholders provide feedback to the government and vice-versa. It is based on the prior definition of the issue for which views are being sought and requires the provision of relevant information, in addition to feedback on the outcomes of the process.
Engagement: When stakeholders are given the opportunity and the necessary resources (e.g. information, data and digital tools) to collaborate during all phases of the policy cycle and in service design and delivery.
Jordan has an array of legal, policy and institutional frameworks that enable citizens2 and other stakeholders3 to share their knowledge and expertise, provide feedback, shape policymaking and service design and delivery, and promote accountability across public administration. Today, the country has a unique opportunity to transform high-level commitment into concrete action through its current reform agenda, namely the Public Sector Modernisation Roadmap (hereinafter “the Roadmap”) (Government of Jordan, 2022[3]), the Economic Modernisation Vision (EMV) (Government of Jordan, 2022[4]), the Report from the Royal Committee to Modernise the Political System (Government of Jordan, 2021[5]) and the associated government Executive Programme (2023-25) (Government of Jordan, 2022[6]). It can also seek to enhance its relationship with citizens and stakeholders as active partners supporting the government in achieving shared objectives. In this regard, one of the stated aims of the Roadmap is to “foster a sustainable, developed, and capable public sector that is qualified to assume its tasks efficiently and effectively, respond to citizens’ needs and expectations, and enjoy flexibility and responsiveness to meet future challenges” (Government of Jordan, 2022[3]). Moreover, in the preface of the EMV, King Abdullah II emphasises that “citizens are key partners in expediting positive change and benefiting from it” (Government of Jordan, 2022[4]). The government Executive Programme also calls for “a modern state rooted in participation, active citizenship [and] the rule of law” (Government of Jordan, 2022[6]).
At the same time, facilitating and encouraging the role of citizens and stakeholders to participate in public decision-making is dependent on certain prerequisites and conditions. First, as noted in the OECD report The Protection and Promotion of Civic Space: Strengthening Alignment with International Standards and Guidance, fundamental civic freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association must be protected and promoted to ensure that all citizens can access information, express their views and participate in public life on an equal basis (OECD, 2022[7]). Moreover, governments increasingly recognise the importance of establishing channels that allow citizens to provide feedback, propose ideas and submit complaints. CSOs make essential contributions to public life: they can advocate for vulnerable groups and those at-risk of exclusion, provide expertise on subject matter, deliver services, and monitor and evaluate government activities (OECD, 2024[8]). An enabling environment for CSOs allows them to operate freely, access diverse forms of funding and participate in public decision-making as partners supporting governments to align laws, policies and services to societal needs.
Solidarity in Jordan has a rich history, with roots extending back to philanthropic traditions and religious and charitable organisations (Phenix Center for Economic and Informatics Studies, 2021[9]). Furthermore, after a series of democratisation reforms in 1989, the work and scope of civil society activities began to expand. While laws on societies existed as early as the 1930s, the activities of CSOs started to flourish in Jordan during the 1990s (CMEP, 2009[10]). The Arab Spring was yet another catalyst for the evolution of civic space in Jordan in 2011 (Phenix Center for Economic and Informatics Studies, 2021[9]). According to international non-profit organisation CIVICUS, over recent decades, the space for civil society in Jordan has “witnessed both periods of contraction and of expansion, with relationships between CSOs and the government varying” (CIVICUS, n.d.[11]). CSOs have multiplied over the years and their impact on public decision-making has the potential to be significantly stronger with further support (ETF, 2021[12]).
Jordan has made progress in some of the above areas over the past decade, notably by implementing the commitments of their Open Government Partnership (OGP) National Action Plans4 (OGP, n.d.[13]). At the same time, the World Justice Project Rule of Law Index 2022 gave Jordan a score of 0.38 out of 1, with 1 being strongest in the category of open government (WJP, 2022[14]) while Jordan scored in the 27th percentile in the World Bank’s Voice and Accountability indicator (World Bank, 2022[15]). This indicator, – which measures the extent to which citizens can participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of the press – demonstrates that there is room for improvement in order to reverse the trajectory that the country has followed in recent years (Figure 3.1).
Note: Estimate gives the country’s score on the aggregate indicator in units of standard normal distribution, ranging from approximately -2.5 (worst) to 2.5 (best).
Source: World Bank (2022[15]), Voice and Accountability: Estimate - Jordan, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VA.EST?end=2022&locations=JO&name_desc=true&start=2016.
This chapter focuses on how Jordan can further build on its promising foundations to ensure that all citizens can exercise their voice while also providing CSOs with sufficient channels to actively participate in policymaking and contribute to the design and delivery of services, thereby strengthening transparency and accountability.
Legal frameworks are strong but implementation challenges remain
Freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association are fundamental civic freedoms that enable effective citizen and stakeholder participation. In Jordan, these freedoms are enshrined at the highest level, as they are guaranteed by the constitution (Government of Jordan, 1952, amendments in 2011[16]).
Article 15 of the Jordanian constitution guarantees the right to freedom of expression and refers to several modes of expression (e.g. speech, writing, photography and “others”).
Article 16/1 of the Jordanian constitution protects freedom of peaceful assembly by stating that “Jordanians shall have the right to hold meetings within the limits of the law”.
Article 16/2 stipulates that “Jordanians shall have the right to establish societies, unions and political parties provided their objective is lawful, their methods peaceful, and their by-laws not in violation of the provisions of the Constitution”. The constitution delegates authority to the legal code to regulate the operation of these entities. Article 23/2/F guarantees that this right is also applicable to trade unions.
At present, the constitution affords this right to Jordanian citizens. OECD member countries afford the right to legal residents and anyone residing in the country (Figure 3.2).
Percentage of OECD member and non-member countries that provided data in the OECD Survey on Open Government
Note: “All” refers to 51 respondents (32 OECD member and 19 non-member countries). In the context of this graph, “legal resident” refers to any persons with permits to reside in the country, while “anyone residing in the country” covers any persons living in the country. “Anyone” is the broadest term, meaning that any persons inside and outside the country are entitled to exercise these civic freedoms..
Source: OECD (2022[7]), The Protection and Promotion of Civic Space: Strengthening Alignment with International Standards and Guidance, https://doi.org/10.1787/d234e975-en.
Aligning the right to freedom of expression with international standards
The right to freedom of expression covers the right to hold opinions and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, orally, in writing or print (OECD, 2022[7]). Aside from the constitution, other legislation regulates freedom of expression, including the penal code. The penal code includes some rights limitations, particularly concerning slander, defamation, inciting sectarian strife and sedition, and offending religious beliefs (Government of Jordan, 1960, amended in 2011[17]). Jordan is not alone in applying criminal sanctions for defamation, with 88% of OECD members having similar provisions in their laws (OECD, 2022[7]). That being said, while international standards allow for limitations on speech where necessary (out of respect for the rights or reputations of others for the protection of national security, public order, or public health or morals), they also advise that defamation laws should be formulated carefully to ensure that they are proportionate and minimise the risks of stifling freedom of expression in practice (UN, 2011[18]). Jordan could benefit from reviewing the existing legal frameworks on freedom of expression, e.g. defamation, to ensure that they align with international standards.
As in many other countries, restrictions on freedom of expression have been a renewed subject of conversation over the past year in Jordan. International human rights organisation Article 19’s 2023 Global Expression Report categorises Jordan as “highly restricted” (Article 19, 2023[19]). While the country ranks above Algeria and Egypt, it also ranks below Lebanon and Morocco (Article 19, 2023[19]). In 2023, the government adopted the Cybercrime Law, which regulates online activity intending to address online defamation, hate speech and disinformation (Government of Jordan, 2023[20]). While it is important for countries to address and counter cybercrime, the International Centre for Not-for-Profit Law has analysed the law and concluded that “many of the cybercrimes listed in the draft law are vague and overly broad, which could lead to impermissible restrictions on the freedom of expression” (ICNL, 2023[21]). CSOs and journalists interviewed as part of the fact-finding mission expressed similar concerns.
In response to these concerns, King Abdullah II emphasised during a meeting with the National Centre for Human Rights (NCHR) that “the Kingdom was never an oppressive country, and will never be one, and its history is a testament to that”. He has also stated that “combating cybercrimes should not be at the expense of Jordanians’ right to express their opinion and criticise public policies” (HRW, 2023[22]; Jordan Times, 2023[23]), indicating that the way in which the law is interpreted and applied will be crucial.
In this regard, Article 39 of the law states that “the Council of Ministers shall issue the regulations necessary to implement the provisions of this Law” (Government of Jordan, 2023[20]). This provision allows public officials to collaborate with stakeholders to introduce practical guidance on applying the law. Jordan could consider creating a working group or focus group on the Cybercrime Law to allow academics and CSOs, including human rights organisations and journalists, to discuss how to implement the law effectively. In this regard, to minimise an excess of discretion in its application, the government could elaborate secondary guidelines via bylaws/regulations for public officials on interpreting and implementing the law in line with international standards. Training judges and prosecutors on how to apply the law could be beneficial.
Ensuring that positive amendments to the right to freedom of peaceful assembly are reflected in practice
Freedom of peaceful assembly is essential to allow citizens to express their views and they should, in principle, be able to exercise the right to peaceful assembly in all public spaces (OECD, 2022[7]). Aside from the constitution, the Public Gatherings Law, which was adopted in 2004, operationalises this right. In a positive move, the law was amended in 2011 so that organisers no longer require permission from the government to host public meetings or demonstrations. The law now indicates that they only need to notify the relevant authorities, which aligns with international standards (Government of Jordan, 2004, amendments in 2011[24]).
That being said, some implementation challenges remain in practice regarding this amendment. Some CSOs and journalists interviewed during the OECD fact-finding mission mentioned they needed permission from the Ministry of Interior to host events in public and private venues (e.g. hotels). Public bodies in Jordan are also required to inform the Ministry of Interior regarding any events or workshops but are not asked to seek permission.
In addition, the NCHR has also emphasised that some of the existing provisions of the law could constitute an obstacle to the right to peaceful assembly. It has recommended that, for example, Article 2 on the definition of a public meeting be amended to ensure alignment with international standards.
To protect freedom of peaceful assembly, Jordan could assess whether provisions of the Public Gatherings Law are conducive to an enabling environment for civil society. It could also ensure that promising amendments that have been made to the legal framework are reflected in practice, including by reviewing cases where CSOs have been unable to host a public gathering.
Operationalising the right to freedom of association
More details on how this right is operationalised in practice can be found in the section below on the enabling environment for CSOs.
Protecting press freedom and strengthening the information ecosystem
Developing a holistic strategy to promote freedom of the press and support media outlets and journalists
Informed individuals are the foundation of democratic debate and society (OECD, 2024[25]). In addition to protected civic freedoms, a healthy information ecosystem allows citizens and stakeholders to access information, take part in public debate and hold public officials accountable for their decisions and actions. Freedom of the press is a core part of a healthy information ecosystem.
Freedom of the press is guaranteed by Article 15/4 of the Jordanian constitution (Government of Jordan, 1952, amendments in 2011[16]), which states that the licenses of newspapers and information media cannot be revoked except by judicial order. The only permissible derogations to this right are in a state of emergency wherein limited censorship may be imposed in matters related to public safety and national security. The most relevant pieces of legislation are the amended Law Guaranteeing the Right to Access to Information (discussed in further detail in Chapter 2 on transparency and access to information) (Government of Jordan, 2007, amended in 2024[26]), the Press and Publications Law (Government of Jordan, 1998, amended in 2012[27]) and the Audiovisual Media Law (Government of Jordan, 2015[28]). The latter established the Media Commission as the regulator for broadcast media, which resulted in the emergence of new radio and television stations (Government of Jordan, 2015[28]) and contributed considerably to greater media pluralism in Jordan.
The Press and Publications Law provides a framework within which print media can operate. It was amended slightly in 1999 and again in 2012 to bring news websites under its remit. In addition to governing the content of published material, the law allocates a wide range of regulatory functions regarding the operations of media entities to explicitly political bodies and individuals such as the Cabinet, the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (now Ministry of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship, MoDEE) and the Media Commission (Government of Jordan, 1998, amended in 2012[27]). Print media are required to obtain a license to operate and can be blocked if they do not comply with the law.5 The law authorises the director of the Media Commission to block unlicensed websites and shut down entities operating without license (Government of Jordan, 1998, amended in 2012[27]). The amendments also consider third‑party comments as “journalistic material” and place responsibility for the content of these comments with the website owners and editors-in-chief (Government of Jordan, 1998, amended in 2012[27]).
Overall, Jordan can be commended for having a diverse range of state, private and community radio stations and several independent media platforms (RSF, 2023[29]). Reporters Without Borders ranks Jordan 146th out of 180 countries in its 2023 World Press Freedom Index (see Figure 3.3 for the score) (RSF, 2023[29]), noting challenges regarding media independence and pluralism. For example, some television channels are partly government-owned and some editors are appointed by public bodies, affecting their ability to report impartially (RSF, 2023[29]). In addition, privately owned media outlets can suffer from a lack of financial resources to operate (RSF, 2023[29]). On the other hand, regarding freedom of expression and press freedom in the digital sphere, Freedom House’s 2023 Freedom on the Net annual survey ranks Jordan as “partly free” given its score of 47/100 and finds that access to the Internet has “improved significantly” over recent years (Freedom House, 2023[30]).
Note: RSF compares the level of press freedom in 180 countries and issues an annual ranking (1 being the best, 180 being the worst) and score per country.
Source: RSF (2023[29]), RSF World Press Freedom Index - Jordan, https://rsf.org/en/country/jordan.
Jordan is already trying to address the challenges that media outlets and journalists face in partnership with these same stakeholders. In 2023, the Ministry of Government Communication began developing a policy to strengthen government communication while improving the legal and regulatory frameworks that govern media actors and highlighting their important role in fostering pluralistic public discourse (Government of Jordan, 2023[31]). As part of the process, the Economic and Social Council (ESC) held a dialogue between the government and media actors before the policy’s approval (Jordan Times, 2023[32]). Moreover, in 2024, a Permanent Committee for Media Freedoms and Human Rights was established with a mandate to:
Create a conducive legislative and regulatory environment that enables the media and journalists to fulfil their important roles.
Provide recommendations and suggestions for developing press freedom in accordance with the provisions of the constitution, legislation, international standards and best practices.
Collaborate with partners that operate in the field of human rights to advance press freedom.6
Jordan could consider building upon existing initiatives by continuing to host workshops, roundtables and discussion groups with media outlets and journalists to discuss the challenges they face in undertaking their vital work. As noted by the NCHR, it could be helpful to develop a national strategy for media and journalists that clarifies relevant legislation outlining the government’s goals – and steps to achieve these – in safeguarding press freedom.
Fortifying the information ecosystem by improving media literacy and combatting mis-and disinformation
Jordan has made significant progress in relation to improving the broader public interest information ecosystem through initiatives on public communication and media literacy. Like all OECD members, Jordan is not immune to the growing spread of mis- and disinformation.7 A survey undertaken by the Rased Al Hayat Centre in 2023 found that 16% of respondents were happy to be the first to share news regardless of its validity, while 13% said that sharing news, regardless of its accuracy, makes them feel influential (UNDP, 2023[33]). In this context, the government is ramping up efforts to strengthen critical thinking, foster media literacy, improve public communication and share more accurate and timely information with citizens. Some of these initiatives include the following:
The fact-checking Your Right to Know or Haggak Tiraf platform allows citizens to quickly verify information, particularly on social media, before they share or circulate it further (Government of Jordan, n.d.[34]).
The online portal called Our Trust, established by the Ministry of Culture, includes resources for training on media literacy for schools, universities and CSOs, as well as a set of educational videos on the topic (Ministry of Culture, n.d.[35]).
The Ministry of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship launched the Government Communication Forum in 2023. The forum allows public officials to present or explain their policies and programmes to the public and media actors and journalists, covering different policy areas each time, e.g. education, agriculture and health. The forum is weekly and is live-streamed on social media. It enables the government to combat false news and rumours by providing reliable information and fostering exchanges between the government, the media and citizens.8
Addressing false information requires a multifaceted approach, acknowledging there is no one-size-fits-all solution (UNDP, 2023[33]). Countries are increasingly implementing policies to foster societal resilience to mis- and disinformation and upgrade governance measures to enable public institutions to support the integrity of the information space (OECD, 2024[25]). Jordan has not yet developed a mature and comprehensive strategy, guide or toolkit to counter mis- and disinformation (OECD, 2021[36]). In this vein, Jordan could build upon its existing efforts by developing an overarching framework to strengthen the information ecosystem and combat mis- and disinformation, which could be led by the Permanent Committee for Media Freedoms and Human Rights under the guidance of the Ministry of Government Communication and Ministry of Culture.
The civil society sector in Jordan is diverse and key to supporting the reform agenda
CSOs can take on a range of roles and effectively collaborate and co‑operate with the government to achieve shared goals (OECD, 2022[7]). For example, given their proximity to the communities in which they operate, they can provide social services, education and healthcare services in collaboration with the government. With a strong enabling environment, they can act as an interface or mediator between citizens and the government in support of the public interest. They can also act as essential advocacy or watchdog organisations that speak on behalf of those who are underrepresented, monitor government activities and hold public officials to account. Their essential role in society is increasingly recognised as governments work towards creating an environment that facilitates and supports their activities (OECD, 2022[7]).
CSOs in Jordan can be broadly divided into two categories:9 societies10 and non-profit companies,11 most of which are based in the capital city Amman. With no official data available, most of these work on topics such as poverty, youth, refugees, gender, education, disability and healthcare, according to interviewees during the OECD fact-finding mission. Many have a service provision rather than an advocacy role, with most focused on supplying essential services to their communities. There are also organisations under honorary royal patronage, given the importance of the areas and sectors they work on. These often work on matters pertaining to vulnerable groups, such as the King Hussein and Jordan River Foundations.
A range of legal, policy and institutional frameworks regulate the civil society sector
Processes and procedures for CSOs to register and operate could be streamlined
In order to operate, societies and non-profit companies are required by law to register. Registration can be done through the Register of Societies at the Ministry of Social Development or the Companies Control Department for non-profit companies. According to the Register of Societies, approximately 6 625 societies are currently in operation in the country, while the Companies Control Department has about 1 500 registered non-profit companies.12
The Register of Societies at the Ministry of Social Development could shorten registration times
The main legislative instrument regulating societies is Societies Law No. 51 (Government of Jordan, 2008[37]) of 2008 and its amendments in 2009 (Government of Jordan, 2009[38]), as well as Societies Regulation No. 57/2010 (Government of Jordan, 2010[39]) and the recently amended Regulation for the Specified Regulation of the Provisions of the Societies Bylaws, Societies Regulation No. 25/2023 (Government of Jordan, 2023[40]). The law does not permit the formation of groups that pursue “political objectives” as Jordan has a specific law on the right to form and join political parties, or groups that carry out activities contrary to “public order” (Government of Jordan, 2009[38]). In 2021, the Ministry of Social Development formed the Committee for Amending the Societies Law to introduce reforms to the legal framework; however, it did not proceed past the initial stages. In a positive development, the committee was restructured to include more representatives from CSOs and ministries in 2023, with ongoing discussions on the law.
The law grants the Ministry of Social Development extensive responsibilities in relation to societies and establishes the Register of Societies. Responsibility for managing the register lies with a board of directors chaired by the Minister of Social Development. This board is comprised of the following representatives from relevant ministries and the charitable or volunteer sector (Government of Jordan, n.d.[41]):
Secretary General of Register of Societies
Representative from the Ministry of Interior
Representative from the Ministry of Culture
Representative from the Ministry of Environment
Representative from the Ministry of Political and Parliamentary Affairs
Representative from the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities
Four experts in voluntary and charity works.13
The Register of Societies and the Ministry of Social Development provide the information organisations must register on their respective websites, per the Societies Law and the Societies Regulation (Government of Jordan, n.d.[42]). A society must submit its application to the register with the following information:
Name and address of the main office and branches of the charitable society, social organisation or union (if the organisation is based outside of Jordan).
Names of founding members, ages, occupations and places of residence. Members must be over 18 years old.
Description of the main purpose for the establishment and other goals the society strives to achieve.
Terms of membership, subscription and means of ending membership.
Election details of the board of administrators that will handle the work of the society and supervise its affairs.
Supervision and control of the financial affairs of the society.
Information on disposing of the society’s funds upon its dissolution, provided this is in line with its objectives and the funds are used inside the Kingdom (Government of Jordan, n.d.[42]).
Organisations must fill various professional roles internally to meet the baseline requirements for registration. While the law does not mandate a specific number of staff for certain functions, it does note that societies should have an administrative committee and a legal accountant. This requirement could be burdensome for small or recently founded organisations, as they may not have adequate financial resources to pay for such staff. Jordan could reassess whether its requirements (e.g. staff functions) are overly prescriptive, especially for smaller societies or those with limited financial and human resources.
As a positive step, following the COVID-19 pandemic, applications for registration can now be submitted online, while the in-person option remains available. This change significantly facilitates the process. The board must approve or deny a registration request within 60 days (Government of Jordan, n.d.[42]). If the application is submitted to one of the field offices of the Ministry of Social Development located outside of Amman, the office is required to send the application to the register within seven days. If any of the registration requirements are missing, the register notifies the applicant within 15 days of receipt of the application. Overall, this means that the entire process can take up to almost 90 days from the submission date, which is comparatively long compared to other countries (Figure 3.4).
In this regard, Jordan could explore possibilities to reduce the time required for registration, for example, the register could aim to immediately inform the applicant if certain documents are missing and the board could consider shortening its current 60-day deadline.
At times, societies may be advised to amend their goals or make other changes, for example, if they have the same name as another registered society. In case of an outright rejection, an applicant can submit an appeal to the Administrative Court. The board justifies rejections to the applicant. The board can also revoke a registration, for example, if a society stops conducting activities for a year, accepts foreign funding without approval or fails to elect an administrative committee. Societies can also submit an appeal to the Administrative Court if their status is revoked. To ensure due process, fairness and accountability, Jordan could ensure that all applications, if rejected or revoked, are accompanied by a detailed justification of why and how decisions are made.
Percentage of OECD member and non-member countries that provided data in the OECD Survey on Open Government
Note: "All" refers to 41 respondents (24 OECD member and 17 non-member countries).
Source: OECD (2022[7]), The Protection and Promotion of Civic Space: Strengthening Alignment with International Standards and Guidance, https://doi.org/10.1787/d234e975-en.
The Companies Control Department at the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Supply could introduce maximum deadlines for approval
Companies Law No. 22/1997 (Government of Jordan, 1997[43]) and Non-Profit Companies Regulation No. 73/2010 (Government of Jordan, 2010[44]) regulate the activities of non-profit companies. Non-profit companies register with the Companies Control Department (n.d.[45]).
Registration of non-profit companies is done electronically on a webpage.14 There is no specific timeline for the registration of non-profit companies. However, approval is required from the Ministry of Interior, which is not the case for societies. The length of the process thus depends on the time needed to obtain the approval. Once the ministry grants approval, the Companies Control Department registers the non‑profit company. The steps for the application include:
Entering the type of company, its location and its management structure.
Selecting goals as per the National Classification for Economic Activities (ISIC4) system.
Entering the details of the founders and partners (e.g. identification, shares in the company).
Entering the details of the relevant contracts and bylaws.
After submitting the application, the applicant receives a notification specifying whether the information is under review, whether information needs to be amended, the status of the approval from the Ministry of Interior and the status of fee payment. The Companies Control Department could seek to introduce maximum deadlines, including the time required for approval from the Ministry of Interior, to ensure that non-profit companies understand how long the process may take.
The Takamul platform has the potential to provide an overview of the civil society sector and promote its activities
The Register of Societies currently provides a range of important information and data on its website (Government of Jordan, n.d.[41]). For example, the website provides an overview of the register’s structure and board of directors, as well as an information centre with guidance on its services. It regularly publishes articles on training workshops with societies. The register also includes a full database of the societies in operation in Jordan (Government of Jordan, n.d.[46]). All entries include the headquarters of the organisation, whether it operates at the local, national or international level, its area of operation, the responsible ministry and its name and identification number. Currently, there are societies cross-registered with 14 ministries with which they work, all of which are also visible in the database (Government of Jordan, n.d.[46]).
The Companies Control Department also publishes a database of registered non-profit companies (n.d.[45]) where users can search for a company. Like the Register of Societies, users can search for any non-profit company by the name or number of the company, name of a partner, type of company, the outlined goals and time of registration.
In a promising step, the Register of Societies launched the Takamul platform in early 2024 as a national platform that gathers and consolidates all existing information on societies (Government of Jordan, 2023[47]) (see Box 3.1).
The Takamul platform (https://societies.ammangov.jo) was launched in January 2024 as a national platform for societies. It connects them with more than 36 public bodies and collates information supplied by societies, including type of organisation (e.g. charity, forum, network, council, organisation), governmental affiliation (e.g. Ministry of Culture), sector (e.g. environmental, health, religious, etc.), status (e.g. operational, inactive), events and programmes, and board members. Currently, the platform can be used by societies and relevant public bodies but it will also be open to the wider public in the future. As of January 2024, 64% of societies in operation had been registered on the platform.
As part of the development process, in 2023, public officials tested the platform and gathered feedback to improve user experience and enhance services. In addition, 17 training sessions were conducted for 5 000 societies with over 10 000 individuals taking part. In collaboration with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), two workshops were also held with stakeholders on the classification of societies and the revised Classification Manual. Seventeen contact numbers were established for Takamul to provide firsthand support, with 850 enquiries addressed daily.
In 2024, public officials aim to raise greater awareness of the platform through targeted social media campaigns, to build on 24 000 views and interactions across social media platforms (e.g. Facebook, YouTube) in 2023 and the current count of over 10 000 followers on Facebook.
Source: Information provided by the Register of Societies, 2024.
The Takamul platform has significant potential to bring government and CSOs closer together. The Register of Societies can build further awareness of the platform by continuing to organise workshops and trainings on its use. In the medium to long term, Jordan could consider transforming the Takamul platform into a comprehensive one-stop shop where all CSOs can register, find information on other organisations and their activities, interact with one another, apply for funding, provide financial reports and identify opportunities to participate in public decision-making.
To gain a more accurate overview of the composition of the sector, Jordan could optimise the information contained in the databases of both societies and non-profit companies. This could include publishing information and disaggregated data on each respective website on topics and types of activity (e.g. poverty reduction, youth) and how many CSOs work in Amman compared to other districts. In addition, information on the CSOs themselves could be provided to allow them to contact and potentially collaborate. For societies, this information could be publicised on the Takamul platform. Users could also have the ability to download or export the data and then re-organise or re-use it as they see fit. Lastly, this information could be used to issue annual reports with an overview of the sector year-on-year.
Equalising procedures for societies and non-profit companies through a joint oversight body could strengthen the civil society sector
Overall, the existence of two legal frameworks and two separate processes for societies and non-profit companies creates misunderstanding and, in many cases, different treatment for organisations performing similar tasks. Many interviewees noted that some societies register as non-profit companies to avoid restrictions that are only applied to societies and because it is considered less burdensome to do so. In addition, the requirements for societies and non-profit companies to register and report on their activities can pose challenges for those with limited resources and capacity.
Jordan could consider reviewing both its Law on Societies and its Companies Law to include clearer definitions of a society versus a non-profit company as well as the functions and topic areas in which they can work. Any discussions on revising the law must be done in collaboration with a wide range of societies and non-profit companies to ensure that their perspectives are considered. Establishing a working group that brings together representatives from the Register of Societies and the Companies Control Department to clarify and communicate the differences could also prove useful. Moreover, they could already work more closely through existing channels: for example, a representative from the Companies Control Department could be invited to join the board of directors at the Register of Societies to ensure alignment. Jordan could seek to equalise procedures between both bodies to avoid organisations registering with one simply because it is less demanding to do so. In the long term, Jordan could empower an existing body or consider establishing one joint oversight body to supervise, oversee and regulate the entire civil society sector (societies and non-profit companies) to align procedures.
Stable and diversified funding for societies and non-profit companies is crucial
Consistent sources of public and private funding are essential for CSOs as they allow them to plan their activities, hire the necessary staff, establish offices, handle administrative and reporting duties, and fulfil the stated goals of their programmes. Predictable funding is essential for the sector to function effectively and develop its capacities. In order to support their important role in society, many governments offer some form of financial assistance to CSOs, with some even providing long-term core funding that gives them the flexibility to operate over several years without applying for individual grants (OECD, 2022[7]). In countries where government funding is limited or unavailable, foreign or international funding can also provide a valuable lifeline for CSOs. In this case, CSOs often rely on the government to facilitate and incentivise foreign and international donors to support the sector. At the same time, to maintain the independence and autonomy of CSOs, it is important for governments also to facilitate the diversification of funding sources for CSOs, such as private donations or crowdfunding, to boost their financial sustainability and independence (OECD, 2022[7]).
CSOs can benefit from public benefit status and special tax regimes
Like CSOs in all OECD member countries and some MENA economies (e.g. Lebanon, Morocco and Tunisia), societies and non-profit companies in Jordan can benefit from special tax regimes and, in some cases, public benefit status. Organisations with public benefit purposes, such as religious, charitable, cultural, educational, sports and health organisations, are eligible for an income tax exemption. Some may also apply for charitable status, which exempts all donations made to them from income tax if the exempted income does not exceed one-quarter of the donor’s taxable income (ICNL, n.d.[48]). Societies and non‑profit companies are not exempted from sales tax.15
The Law on Societies also states that religious entities and orders operating in the Kingdom have the right to undertake charitable services with a public interest goal. These include but are not limited to establishing shelters, educational institutes for the needy, community centres for the poor, as well as providing regulated financial or in-kind assistance and medical treatment (Government of Jordan, 2009[38]).
Government funding could be expanded by building on existing support
The amount of government funding available to CSOs is relatively limited in Jordan. At present, 14 ministries16 support societies working in the same sector with specific grants and other forms of funding.17 Institutions, such as the Jordan Enterprise Development Corporation and the Development and Employment Fund, also provide some form of funding to societies and non-profit companies.
Moreover, the Ministry of Social Development has a Society Support Fund, managed by the Register of Societies, alongside a Directorate of Enhancing Competitiveness and a Directorate of Societies, providing financial support. The Society Support Fund is the main source of financial support to societies from the government. Approximately 80-100 organisations receive regular funding. However, not all societies are eligible and the selection criteria for those that can apply to receive funding change year on year (Phenix Center for Economic and Informatics Studies, 2021[9]). Access to government funding is also an important issue. It requires clarity on where and how organisations can apply and transparent decisions on who receives funding, why and for what purpose. Some CSOs may have more opportunities as they are well‑known and longstanding organisations with strong relationships and networks.
Jordan could take inspiration from the practices of many OECD members and economies in the region that provide consistent government funding to CSOs (Figure 3.5).
Percentage of OECD member and non-member countries that provided data in the OECD Survey on Open Government
Note: “All” refers to 51 respondents (32 OECD member and 19 non-member countries).
Source: OECD (2022[7]), The Protection and Promotion of Civic Space: Strengthening Alignment with International Standards and Guidance, https://doi.org/10.1787/d234e975-en.
Jordan could consider expanding upon the existing Society Support Fund to provide diversified government support to societies, including those working in advocacy, producing research and acting as watchdogs to strengthen social accountability.
Promoting transparency and access to information on foreign funding can change perceptions among CSOs
Many CSOs in Jordan rely on international donors to support the sector and thus depend on the government’s ability to facilitate and incentivise foreign funding. At the same time, any money entering the country is under increased scrutiny as Jordan continues its efforts to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism (FATF, 2023[49]).18 Within this context, CSOs that wish to receive foreign funding must submit an application that includes the source and amount of funding requested, the purpose of the funding and a project proposal.
To ease this process, the government adopted the Mechanism to Obtain Approval for Foreign Funding in 2019 (Government of Jordan, 2019[50]). The mechanism was developed in collaboration with CSOs through Jordan’s Fourth OGP National Action Plan (OGP, 2018[51]). It shortened the time for CSOs to obtain approval for an application to 30 days – where the previous process could take several months – and allowed CSOs to track the status of their applications.
The mechanism was further updated in 2023 and details were published on the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (MoPIC) website (Government of Jordan, 2023[52]). It clarifies the procedures for obtaining funding, outlines MoPIC’s mandate with regard to foreign funding, offers an overview of the duties of the Foreign Funding Committee and provides timelines for each step of the approval process (Government of Jordan, 2023[52]). In January 2024, MoPIC posted instructions on the updated mechanism on its website.
MoPIC’s Foreign Funding Unit is supported by the Foreign Funding Committee, which meets weekly. The secretary general of MoPIC is the head of the committee and the other members include (Government of Jordan, 2023[52]):
a director from the Prime Ministry
a director from the Ministry of Interior
a director from the Ministry of Social Development
a director from the Companies Control Department
a representative from the ministry of the topic related to the CSO sector.
To support CSOs in applying for foreign funding for a project, the Foreign Funding Unit launched an awareness-raising campaign and a training programme in 2023 so that CSOs can self-assess their eligibility and increase their competitive advantage. In collaboration with the Ministry of Interior, the unit is hosting sessions in all 12 governorates.19 The training includes a self-assessment tool which asks CSOs to reflect on their technical capabilities (e.g. qualifications of staff, expertise in the topic, ability to prepare a proposal, experience in implementing projects, preparing periodic or annual reports, need for a local partner, etc.). It then evaluates the financial structure and governance of the CSO (e.g. having a registration certificate, issuing annual budgets, any violations or penalties, etc.). Lastly, it supports CSOs in assessing the project proposal itself (e.g. consistency with national priorities, alignment with relevant laws and regulations, having an action plan for implementation, identifying a clear target group, developing progress indicators, etc.). The training programmes and the self-assessment tool represent good practices that can foster dialogue between the government and CSOs on foreign funding. The Foreign Funding Unit could make additional efforts to publicise and promote this initiative and these tools. For example, it could publish the relevant materials online to ensure that all CSOs, including those that did not or could not attend, are aware of the campaign and programme and can also access the training and self-assessment tool.
Upon receiving an application, the Foreign Funding Committee can accept, suggest amendments or reject the application. Approval is automatically granted if a decision is not taken within 30 days of formally notifying the applicant. Application acceptance rates are generally high and have been increasing over recent years. Ninety percent of submissions were accepted in 2020, 96% in 2021, 95% in 202220 and 98% in 2023.21 Despite this, there is a perception among some CSO interviewees that applications are frequently rejected. The government could try to change this perception by clearly communicating this matter to CSOs. For example, Jordan could publish up-to-date statistics on the number of requests received for foreign funding, including approvals and denials. It could also publish more detailed information on the foreign funding that is granted to CSOs, disaggregated by type of activity, location and amount of funding.
Before accepting or rejecting an application, the Foreign Funding Unit can sometimes ask CSOs to clarify or adjust their activities. At the same time, during the fact-finding mission, interviewees highlighted that they have at times been requested to change their programmes or activities in ways that do not necessarily align with their operations or goals. To ensure that suggested changes are congruent with the organisation’s objectives, the unit could schedule a meeting to discuss the application with the CSO before proposing modifications.
According to government interviewees, in the rare case of a rejection, it is most likely due to the following reasons:22
The funded proposed project does not align with national priorities (social welfare, gender, water, climate and youth).
The funded proposed project does not align with the objectives, speciality or field of society.
The project budget does not match the implemented activities.
The administrative expenses (salaries of project staff) of the funded proposed project are extremely high.
The CSO does not comply with the relevant legal, financial and administrative requirements, which include, for example, an annual budget, the declaration of the actual beneficiary and the financial and administrative status of the organisation.
The CSO does not have a sufficient governance system (e.g. no clear vision or mission, lack of a transparent human resources system for appointing staff to the project, no system for procurement or registering the assets of the CSO)
CSO interviewees highlighted a lack of alignment with national priorities as one of the main justifications for a denied application. However, CSOs noted that they are not always fully aware of national priorities. They also perceive that the government generally tends to be more supportive of CSOs working in economic empowerment, community development (e.g. services and infrastructure) and charity and humanitarian aid.23 The Foreign Funding Unit could make additional efforts to clearly outline the national priorities for funding on an annual basis so that they are evident to CSOs before applying. They could be publicised on the relevant websites and further integrated into awareness-raising campaigns and training programmes. In the future, these national priorities could be decided in consultation with CSOs and other relevant stakeholders.
Applications where a high percentage of the funding is dedicated to administrative costs and staff salaries can also be subject to denials. The unit checks the cost of fixed employees on the payroll, which should not exceed a certain percentage of the project’s total cost. At the same time, organisations are welcome to hire as many external experts as needed for a specific project or programme. However, it is important to note that the main “product” of certain CSOs is knowledge work and intellectual services, such as organisations that engage in advocacy, monitoring and evaluation and watchdog-type activities. Ensuring that such CSOs have access to diverse sources of funding is crucial to their effectiveness, professionalisation, and sustainability in the medium-to long-term. When it comes to reviewing applications that have high staff costs, it is important to distinguish between the types of CSOs and types of projects concerned, as some may require more resources for core staff than others (e.g. advocacy, monitoring and evaluation and watchdog organisations) as well as staff with specific competencies. It could be beneficial to include civil society representatives in the Foreign Funding Committee to share the perspectives of diverse types of CSOs, building on the good practice of the Register of Societies.
Overall, Jordan should consider striking the right balance between caution and control regarding foreign funding. While, in general, it is not advisable – as per the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) – for governments to approve foreign funding for CSOs, it is important to acknowledge the particularities of the Jordanian context. Given the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing, the approvals process may be necessary and the government can instead focus on ensuring it is as transparent, fair and accountable as possible.
Mainstreaming the involvement of CSOs in public decision-making will foster effective and evidence-based policies and services
Offering CSOs an opportunity to actively engage in policymaking as well as service design and delivery contributes to more effective decision-making. In many countries, this manifests through public consultations with CSOs on specific laws, strategies, policy proposals or budgets. Institutionalised opportunities to engage in policymaking offer longevity and legitimacy to stakeholder participation as they become routine rather than ad hoc.
In Jordan, CSOs are invited to provide feedback on policymaking and service delivery, participate in consultations (on-line and in person) and are given space to advocate for improvements to legislative or policy reforms. They can send recommendations to government committees or working groups on specific issues, for example social welfare. In general, opportunities for public consultation are available on an ad hoc basis. CSO interviewees outlined that dialogue mostly happens through government-initiated technical committees and that their success varies. The perception is that the Royal Committees, which the Royal Hashemite Court establishes, tend to be more productive due to the clarity of their mandates, processes and expected outcomes. Moreover, Royal Committees frequently channel private sector expertise in designing and managing the process, contributing positively to more effective implementation overall.
There is a perception that CSOs have different opportunities to participate based on the type of organisation they represent, their location and their size. For example, CSO interviewees noted that those invited to participate in public consultations, discussion groups or working groups are often well-known organisations, such as the national branches of renowned international CSOs or large and well-established CSOs based in Amman. CSOs also noted that there is a need to engage specialised CSOs more, both in wide-ranging national reform efforts and in discussions on specific legislative or policy proposals pertaining to their area of expertise. It is important that all CSOs participate equally in public debates, discourse and decision-making, especially when it is related to their area of expertise. Public bodies in Jordan could thus make efforts to ensure that a range of CSOs are given an opportunity to share their insights, e.g. by experimenting with open calls rather than selecting a number of CSOs directly.
In Jordan, few public bodies institutionalise stakeholder participation in public decision-making, meaning that CSOs are routinely consulted or are core members of a permanent public body, council or commission. Some good practices can be noted, for example the CSOs on the board of directors within the Registry of Societies (see the section on the registry), the Jordanian National Commission for Women (JNCW) (see Chapter 5 on gender) and the Economic and Social Council (ESC). The ESC was established in 2009 as an advisory body to the government to guide social and economic policy. It comprises experts from the private sector and academia and ensures dialogue on issues such as socio-economic inequality, unemployment, poverty and education (ESC, n.d.[53]).
To foster dialogue and informal and formal interactions on an ongoing basis, a cross-cutting permanent body that is comprised of both public officials and CSOs could be established or a similar body, such as the ESC, could be expanded and empowered with such a role. Such an advisory group or expert forum could strengthen the government-CSO relationship and help to build trust between the nominated representatives. In addition, it could be useful to assign an office or officer within each ministry and/or public body responsible for relations with CSOs and working with other public bodies to improve the enabling environment through sharing information and building capacity.
Box 3.2 provides examples of other countries with bodies that have a mandate to ensure engagement with civil society actors.
Finland
The Advisory Board for Civil Society Policy (KANE) operates under the auspices of the Ministry of Justice and is tasked with promoting interactions and collaboration between the public administration and civil society and improving the enabling environment and operating conditions for CSOs. A government decree outlines the tasks and composition of KANE. The board consists of representatives from CSOs, research organisations, the private sector, ministries and other public agencies, and is elected for a four-year term.
Romania
Romania has a variety of permanent mechanisms for consultations with CSOs. Public bodies are encouraged to create an office through which they consult with representatives of the associations and foundations that operate in their sphere of competency. Moreover, the Economic and Social Council is an advisory body for the public administration and parliament. The council is autonomous and was created to facilitate a tripartite dialogue between employers’ organisations, trade unions and representatives of CSOs and foundations at the national level. Its main task is to review draft normative acts before they are adopted and sent to parliament. Most ministries at the national level and all governing bodies at the level of the counties are required to create consultative social dialogue commissions, which consist of public officials, representatives of employers’ organisations and nationally representative trade union organisations.
Sources: Finnish Ministry of Justice (n.d.[54]), The Advisory Board for Civil Society Policy (KANE), https://oikeusministerio.fi/en/advisory-board-on-civil-society-policy#:~:text=The%20Advisory%20Board%20for%20Civil,operating%20conditions%20for%20civil%20society; OECD (2021[55]), Civic Space Scan of Finland, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/f9e971bd-en; OECD (2023[56]), Open Government Review of Romania, https://doi.org/10.1787/ff20b2d4-en; OECD (2023[57]), Civic Space Review of Romania, https://doi.org/10.1787/f11191be-en.
A permanent body for Jordan could be informed by and build upon the successes of Jordan’s existing OGP Multi-Stakeholder Forum (see Chapter 4 on youth and Chapter 5 on gender) (Figure 3.3) (OGP, 2023[58]) as well as its ESC (n.d.[53]).
As part of the development of Jordan’s 2021-25 OGP National Action Plan, MoPIC formed a working group to facilitate its technical development. This was the first co-creation process of its kind.
In line with good practice, the Multi-Stakeholder Forum consisted of an equal number of government and civil society stakeholders. It included representatives of CSOs from across Jordan, focusing on a range of issues, as well as representatives from the private sector. On the government side, it included national institutions promoting women’s and youth’s rights.
In parallel, MoPIC launched an open call to identify priorities and propose commitments to be included in the action plan. The opportunity was promoted on social media to broaden its target audience and 40 CSOs submitted proposals on commitments.
Source: OGP (2023[58]), Jordan Action Plan Review 2021-2025, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/jordan-action-plan-review-2021-2025/.
Outlining a vision through a strategy for CSOs can highlight the value of the sector
Many governments have begun to develop policy frameworks or strategies to articulate their vision for improving the enabling environment for CSOs (Figure 3.6) (OECD, 2022[7]). Such a document can be beneficial as it encourages the government to reflect on the value of civil society and how CSOs can contribute to good governance and sustainable development in the short, medium and long terms (OECD, 2022[7]).
Percentage of OECD member and non-member countries that provided data in the OECD Survey on Open Government
Note: “All” refers to 50 respondents (31 OECD member and 19 non-member countries).
Source: OECD (2022[7]), The Protection and Promotion of Civic Space: Strengthening Alignment with International Standards and Guidance, https://doi.org/10.1787/d234e975-en.
Some of the stated objectives of CSO strategies include strengthening the state-CSO relationship, supporting volunteering and donations, inclusion and social cohesion, improving welfare, promoting public dialogue and improving public consultation (OECD, 2022[7]). Box 3.4 provides some examples.
Legal and policy framework for CSOs in Slovenia
The 2018 Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) Act requires ministries to create an enabling environment for NGOs to contribute to societal goals in a wide range of policy areas, from sports and culture to ecology and healthcare. This includes developing strategies, action plans and standardised measures for public consultation and guarantees the engagement of NGOs in public decision-making processes. Furthermore, ministries are responsible for reporting on the sector’s development, collecting data on funding and monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the act. In addition, Slovenia sets out its vision for the sector through its National Strategy for the Development of the Non-Governmental Sector and Volunteering and has a Council for the Promotion of the Development of Volunteering and Volunteer and Non-Governmental Organisations, which serves as a consultative body of the government of the Republic of Slovenia.
Civil Society Policy in Estonia
The Strong Civil Society 2021-24 policy aims to strengthen civil society, enhance decision-making with CSO involvement and increase population engagement in voluntary work. It includes a monitoring and evaluation framework with measurable targets for both short- and long-term deliverables and a budget for all four years. Ministries oversee programme activities and provide annual reports. The Ministry of the Interior compiles and publicly shares an overall performance report on the policy.
Sources: Government of Slovenia (2018[59]), Non-Governmental Organisations Act (ZNOrg), https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MJU/SNVO/ENG/Act-On-Non-Governmental-Organisations-ZNOrg.docx; Government of Slovenia (n.d.[60]), Non-governmental Organisations, https://www.gov.si/en/topics/non-governmental-organisations/#:~:text=The%20Non%2DGovernmental%20Organisations%20Act,association%20in%20the%20public%20interest; Government of Estonia (n.d.[61]), A Strong Civil Society 2021–2024, https://www.siseministeerium.ee/tegevusvaldkonnad/sidus-uhiskond/kodanikuuhiskond.
In line with the above, Jordan could consider developing a strategy for CSOs which offers an overview of the current state of play, a vision for the CSO-government relationship, a commitment to collaborate with CSOs in public decision-making and how the government intends to support CSOs in the short, medium and long terms.
The responsiveness of the public administration to its citizens is a crucial factor that influences the level of trust in government (OECD, 2022[62]). Actively listening to citizens, providing a channel for them to share their views and reacting to their feedback are fundamental to building buy-in with public decision-making.
Empowering oversight and co‑ordination bodies and streamlining feedback and complaints mechanisms
There are a myriad of oversight institutions and public bodies with a specific role in civic freedoms and human rights in Jordan. In addition, many public bodies have a duty to respond to suggestions, complaints and feedback that are specific to their own mandates. For example, the Jordanian Integrity and Anti-Corruption Commission (JIACC) receives alerts from citizens on potential cases of misuse of public funds or misconduct of public officials. Jordan has also introduced centralised and consolidated platforms (e.g. the Bekhedmetkom platform, the Tawasal e-participation portal), which serve as a “catch-all” for citizens to submit their ideas, proposals and grievances and identify ways to engage with public decision-making. The below section provides an overview of how these oversight bodies and feedback and complaints mechanisms currently function while identifying existing gaps and areas for improvement.
Improving co‑operation among bodies with a mandate on civic freedoms and guiding public officials in responding to human rights complaints
The NCHR plays an essential role in protecting and promoting civic freedoms
Independent oversight bodies for civic freedoms are essential in safeguarding citizens, acting as mediators between individuals and the government, and addressing any violations. In many countries, they take the form of a national human rights institution or ombudsman institution that has a constitutional or legal mandate to protect civic freedoms at the national level, as well as the regional level in certain countries (GANHRI, n.d.[63]).
In Jordan, the NCHR is the pivotal institution with this role and is accredited by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI, n.d.[64]). Established in 2002, it receives complaints, investigates potential violations, monitors government developments related to civic freedoms and communicates with citizens on how to exercise their rights (NCHR, n.d.[65]). While the board of trustees is appointed by royal decree, the centre is perceived to operate independently both administratively and financially, submitting its budget – drawn from the General State Budget – to the government for approval. The NCHR actively engages in global and regional network meetings, positioning itself as a reference point in the field. As mentioned during the OECD fact-finding mission, the centre promotes civic freedoms both in Jordan and in the wider MENA region, with a particular focus on vulnerable groups, including women, children, migrants, refugees and people with disabilities. The centre also collaborates extensively with the National Centre for Curriculum Development to integrate education on human rights into the curriculum and raise awareness among the public.
The NCHR also issues annual reports submitted to King Abdullah II, the Cabinet, the judiciary and the upper and lower houses of parliament. Its recommendations are not legally binding but all public bodies must review and act upon them. Many recommendations have led to improvements to relevant legal frameworks and their implementation (NCHR, n.d.[66]). For instance, one of its previous proposals called for the creation of the Office of the Government Coordinator for Human Rights (OGCHR) within the Prime Ministry, which has since been established. In addition, as mentioned during the fact-finding mission, they are frequently consulted by public bodies on key legislative and policy proposals in areas of interest. Overall, the role and mandate of the NCHR in Jordan are highly valued and positively viewed by public bodies and CSOs alike.
The NCHR has established a robust complaints department, responding to a diverse range of issues, including those related to education, employment, healthcare and gender equality and can form investigatory teams when necessary. The 2022 and 2023 reports find that many of the complaints pertained to “civil and political rights”, including the right to life, liberty and physical integrity; the right to access to justice and a fair trial; the right to nationality and asylum, the right to vote and run for office, and the rights to establish and join political parties, CSOs and trade unions (NCHR, n.d.[66]). They undertake many activities, including investigations and monitoring, workshops, field visits and training, all of which could benefit from additional public funding. In addition, the NCHR has many ways for citizens to lodge complaints, such as via a hotline and WhatsApp discussion on a 24-hour/7-days-a-week basis (Box 3.5 outlines the process for responding to complaints).
The NCHR has a protocol and a set of procedures which the complaints unit follows. It includes the following stages:
Receiving the complaint
There are various channels through which individuals and organisations can file a complaint; these channels are as follows:
Coming in person to the centre.
Calling the hotline (active 24 hours a day, 7 days a week).
Posting on social media pages of the centre (Twitter, Facebook).
Sending an email, fax.
Sending a text or WhatsApp message.
Filing an online complaint on the centre’s website.
Investigating the complaint
The complaints unit then investigates the complaint to check its validity and verify the veracity of the allegations stated therein. Verification procedures take place as soon as possible and, in urgent cases, occur within the same day of filing the complaint. The procedure includes:
Sending a formal letter to the institution where the violation has been reported to take place, the “respondent institution”, to inform it of the complaint and hear its side of the story.
Conducting a field visit to the institution where the violation has been reported to take place.
Gathering evidence and collect information.
Requesting documents and information from the respondent institution.
Requesting further information from the complainant.
After receiving the respondent institution’s reply to the complaint, the complaints unit informs the individual or organisation who filed the complaint, obtains their feedback and conducts the necessary assessment.
Complaint resolution
In the event the complaint has been verified and is not merely an allegation, the NCHR sends a formal letter to the head of the institution informing them of the violation and requesting that they rectify the situation.
Closing the complaint
Closing the complaint file involves the following five steps and requires different levels of approval to ensure clear, fair and transparent procedures:
Recommendation from the official who followed the complaint.
Recommendation from the head of the complaints unit.
Approval from the head of administration.
Approval from the protection commissioner.
Approval from the general commissioner.
Assessment of the procedure
After the closure of the complaint, an analysis of the complaint is conducted and disclosed through an annex published in the annual report.
Source: Information provided by the NCHR.
There has been an increase in the number of complaints received over recent years, from 548 in 2021 and 620 in 2022 to 638 in 2023 (Figure 3.7).
Despite its important role, the NCHR sometimes faces difficulties due to a lack of human and financial resources. Although there have been increases in the centre’s budget allocation, additional human and financial resources would allow the NCHR to expand its complaints unit and enable it to continue to offer its services to all citizens and residents and fulfil its important oversight role. Moreover, while the NCHR publishes an annual report with disaggregated data, additional breakdowns could be provided, for example, by gender. Jordan could also consider illustrating how many complaints on civic freedoms are received by all relevant bodies, with organised and disaggregated data to aid understanding. The Office of the OGCHR and the Human Rights Unit (HRU) at the Prime Ministry could work with the NCHR on training and capacity-building activities.
Source: Information provided by the NCHR.
The OGCHR and HRU co‑ordinate the implementation of the commitments on human rights across public administration, including the Comprehensive National Plan for Human Rights 2016‑25 (Government of Jordan, 2015[67]). Moreover, they are responsible for preparing and ensuring the plan is compatible with the recommendations of the United Nations Universal Periodic Review (UN, n.d.[68]), monitoring implementation and responding to human rights reports from international bodies. The HRU also facilitates co‑ordination between ministries and other public bodies on human rights and fosters collaboration with local, regional and international CSOs on relevant topics.
The OGCHR and HRU have committed to collaborating with other stakeholders, including CSOs. One promising example is the one-day consultation held in July 2023 wherein the HRU, NCHR, government officials and CSOs discussed Jordan’s Fourth Universal Periodic Review by the United Nations Human Rights Council (Jordan Times, 2023[69]). The government also engages the JNCW (see Chapter 5 on gender for more), the Higher Council for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and regional and local levels of government in the review (Jordan Times, 2023[69]).
The OGCHR and HRU receive complaints from citizens regarding civic freedom violations (Government of Jordan, n.d.[70]). Any citizen who encounters a violation of their human rights can file a complaint through the following channels:
In person at the Prime Ministry service desk.
Via phone call to the landline of the HRU.
Via phone or WhatsApp call to the cell phone of the director of the HRU.
An online complaint via the human rights complaint icon on the Bekhedmetkom platform.
Significant efforts have been made to train public bodies to classify and organise these complaints. As mentioned during the OECD fact-finding mission, 220 focal points across public bodies were trained to categorise, address and – when necessary – redirect complaints to the relevant public body. However, according to interviewees, public officials are sometimes unsure of how to differentiate or classify complaints on human rights compared to other types of complaints. At the same time, interviewees mentioned that citizens do not always understand the roles and responsibilities of different public bodies and do not always direct their suggestions or grievances to the correct public body. In this sense, there is a lack of clarity for both public officials and citizens on submitting and handling complaints.
To reduce the burden on public officials and citizens, the NCHR could conduct training and capacity-building for all relevant bodies on handling and classifying human rights complaints. The relevant bodies for co‑ordinating human rights, e.g. the NCHR, OGCHR and HRU could support such an endeavour. This could include conducting training and workshops on categorising and redirecting complaints for focal points in all relevant public bodies.
The Lower House and Senate Committees for Public Freedom and Human Rights are increasing engagement with citizens and stakeholders
The Parliament of Jordan is comprised of the House of Representatives (n.d.[71]), which has 20 committees, and the Senate (Senate of Jordan, n.d.[72]), which has 17. Both have permanent committees responsible for civic freedoms and human rights. The Senate committee reviews relevant laws, examines and handles complaints, and ensures that international human rights standards are followed in Jordan (Senate of Jordan, n.d.[73]). The Lower House committee is also entrusted with reviewing laws, proposals and suggestions, examining and handling complaints and monitoring the work of reform and rehabilitation centres, temporary detention centres and social care centres (House of Representatives of Jordan, n.d.[74]). In March 2023, the Lower House committee launched a hotline to communicate more directly with citizens concerning human rights violations. The committee works with the NCHR to review complaints when necessary. Moreover, in a positive move, the committee assigned three officials to manage complaints and grievances received via WhatsApp and the hotline.24 Citizens can also submit a complaint to the Lower House committee via a form on the website. Both committees promote their work to citizens and share information and updates on their respective websites and social media.
The Transparency and Human Rights Bureau in the Public Security Directorate (PSD) responds to complaints and reports of malpractice in its domain
The Transparency and Human Rights Bureau was established in 2005 and has a wide range of duties. It receives complaints relating to violations and malpractice from the PSD, which is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Interior (PSD, n.d.[75]). The bureau also has a Human Rights Training Centre where it qualifies and trains officials so they can undertake their duties, with a strong emphasis on promoting human rights and holding workshops and seminars on the topic (PSD, n.d.[75]).
The Transparency and Human Rights Bureau has three sections:
a governance and transparency section
a complaints and reports section
a human rights training centre.
The Primary and High Administrative Courts serve as appeals mechanisms for citizens and stakeholders
Civil courts “exercise their jurisdiction in respect to civil and criminal matters in accordance with the law, and they have jurisdiction over all persons in all matters, civil and criminal, including cases brought against the government” (Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, n.d.[76]). If citizens are not satisfied with how their complaint has been handled or if it involves a suitably serious violation, they can bring their case to the Primary Administrative Court (PAC) and then to the High Administrative Court to seek a verdict or appeal a decision. The PAC specialises in resolving administrative disputes involving decisions made by public officials or bodies. If a citizen has a dispute about a final administrative decision, they can choose to file a case before the High Administrative Court. The court then decides whether the actions taken by the officials are in accordance with the law. The High Administrative Court can reverse the decisions made by the PAC, meaning that citizens can seek an appeal through this court.
Establishing a network of relevant actors could encourage exchange and raise awareness of their work
Given the many actors working on this topic across public administration, it is important that their mandates and roles are clear and that they co‑ordinate closely with one another. At present, there is co‑operation between the Senate, Lower House of Representatives and Legal Committees to ensure that Jordanian legislation complies with international standards in this area. In addition, a public official from the PSD is assigned an office at the Lower House Committee, working as a focal point to co‑ordinate between the Lower House Committee and the PSD concerning any human rights violations claimed to have occurred at the PSD. There is also co‑ordination with the OGCHR and NCHR in the following ways:
Holding meetings to discuss issues related to human rights.
Building capacity and raising awareness among the government co‑ordination team.
Exchanging knowledge and expertise.
The NCHR is often the first point of reference in Jordan for receiving human rights complaints. However, the Lower House and Senate Committees have the ability to hold the executive branch to account more directly by, for example, questioning the prime minister and the Cabinet, or issuing a vote of no confidence. In this regard, the NCHR is currently working with the Lower House to sign a memorandum of understanding. In doing so, the NCHR hopes its annual reports will be consistently discussed in parliament. In this sense, Jordan could seek inspiration from its existing practices and encourage greater co‑ordination and collaboration between all public bodies, which would play a role in advancing the human rights agenda to build upon existing exchanges. In particular, the Lower House and Senate Committees, NCHR, OGCHR and HRU could work more closely to advance the human rights agenda in Jordan. This could take the form of a network that meets regularly with a dedicated public official in each body liaising with the others. This network could hold regular meetings to discuss areas of opportunity and find solutions to common challenges.
Overall, to raise awareness among citizens on the work of these bodies, this network could work together and consider launching a public campaign on the entire ecosystem for civic freedoms (e.g. create videos outlining their respective mandates) and utilising existing social media channels for dissemination. It could also identify ways to foster more interoperability and cross-referencing between all body websites.
Streamlining suggestions, compliments and complaints related to policies and services
JIACC and the Audit Bureau manage complaints related to corruption and misuse of public money
JIACC was established in 2006 as an independent authority with powers to monitor public officials’ wealth growth included in the illicit gain law and recover assets lost due to acts of corruption (JIACC, n.d.[77]). JIACC’s goal is to promote the principles of justice, equality and equal opportunities, correct public administration performance and contribute to building a culture of integrity and fighting corruption (JIACC, n.d.[77]) (see Chapter 6 of the Public Sector Integrity Review of Jordan). The complaints unit at JIACC is responsible for receiving the following:
Information: A citizen can inform the JIACC complaints unit of suspicion of corruption cases. The informant does not provide personal details and, most often, is not directly affected by the case.
Complaint: The injured party or victim of corruption can submit a complaint to the complaints unit (central department), providing their name and full details of the case.
Investor complaint: A complaint submitted by investors goes into a fast-track process.
Grievance: A grievance is submitted by a person harmed by public administration decisions. They complete a special administrative grievance form, available on line on the JIACC website, with a hard copy available in all governate post offices.
The Audit Bureau was established in 1952 to audit the state’s revenues and expenditures (Audit Bureau, n.d.[78]). The bureau is a partner to public bodies and supports financial analysis of audit risks, conducts feasibility studies for the development of projects before their implementation, monitors the outcomes of the projects and evaluates their results (Audit Bureau, n.d.[78]) (see Chapter 5 of the Public Sector Integrity Review of Jordan). The bureau presents an annual report to the Lower House of Representatives and the Senate for each financial year, with over 70 reports submitted to date. Overall, there is a great level of interest and media coverage in these reports and most of the recommendations have been adopted by the government. In October 2022, the Audit Bureau established a new division to receive complaints and enhance its oversight role by raising the level of communication with the local community, media institutions and public bodies, to report any misuse of public money (Audit Bureau, n.d.[78]). As mentioned during the OECD fact-finding mission, the bureau has many different channels, such as WhatsApp, email and a hotline. Interviewees also mentioned a strong relationship between JIACC and the Audit Bureau, and both have signed a memorandum of agreement. Overall, the number of complaints has fluctuated since the creation of the new division. However, the bureau is increasingly active on social media, with citizens gaining more awareness of their work.
Optimising the Bekhedmetkom platform and increasing its visibility to encourage uptake
Digital platforms can enable citizens to find information, offer feedback and make proposals to the government, which can foster transparency and accountability. A prime example of this potential is the At your Service Bekhedmetkom platform launched in 2018. This interactive platform enables direct communication between citizens and the government, offering various options such as asking questions, making suggestions, giving compliments, submitting complaints and reporting potential misuse of funds or misconduct by public officials (Government of Jordan, n.d.[70]). The Ministry of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship (MoDEE) hosts the technical team behind the platform.
Through the Bekhedmetkom platform, the government of Jordan provides a central portal for citizens to send inquiries to different ministries regarding specific policies and services, fostering a culture of responsiveness. The platform includes 106 public entities and provides various communication channels to meet the needs of all social demographics. Each public body handles the questions, suggestions and complaints about their institution.
The stages of managing a request include the following: i) registering the request; ii) notifying the citizen that the request has been registered; iii) analysing, classifying and directing the request; iv) processing the request; and v) closing the application based on the evaluation of the requester. Depending on the degree of risk of the request (from low to critical), the required response time (from one to eight hours) and required time for resolution (from four hours to one week) varies.
Source: Based on information shared during the OECD fact-finding mission.
The platform publishes statistics on the number of complaints received and user satisfaction levels. Although the specific nature of complaints and their outcomes are not publicly reported, the availability of these statistics already demonstrates a degree of transparency.
A study by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (n.d.[79]) has noted the platform’s benefits, including more efficient and effective processing of citizens’ suggestions and complaints. Moreover, the platform allows the government to showcase success stories, encouraging competition between public bodies and providing a source of motivation. At the same time, the World Bank has found that “processes and procedures are not unified” across public bodies (World Bank, 2022[80]) and they can differ in practice from what is outlined in written guidelines per body. The study also found a lack of awareness among some focal points as to their own procedures and practices (World Bank, 2022[80]).
Using user feedback can help public bodies improve platforms and ensure they are fulfilling their purposes. In this vein, public bodies could conduct joint feedback sessions or focus groups with citizens who have used the Bekhedmetkom platform to identify ways to optimise it. Jordan could undertake recurring public communication campaigns to increase visibility around the platform. CSOs could also work as partners to support the government in further promoting this mechanism through different channels (e.g. social media, their websites, etc.). Administering a survey to a large sample size of citizens to determine whether they are knowledgeable about the relevant platforms or if they would use them could also help improve accessibility while promoting the mechanisms. In the medium to long term, the government could consider developing indicators to measure the platform’s performance and identify and act upon shortcomings.
Overall, Jordan could consider clarifying the pathways for feedback mechanisms so citizens can easily understand where to submit their suggestions, proposals and concerns (e.g. Bekhedmetkom platform, WhatsApp, email, hotlines, etc.). The government could create a chatbot that can answer queries from citizens and redirect them to the most relevant public body or platform to submit their feedback or complaints. It could be helpful to map the channels available to citizens on each respective website so they can easily follow the process.
As in many countries, citizens and stakeholders in Jordan are increasingly seeking opportunities to be involved in all stages of the policymaking cycle. Recognising this growing demand, governments actively explore various methods to facilitate meaningful citizen and stakeholder participation. In Jordan, there are some opportunities for organised stakeholders (e.g. civil society or the private sector) to participate in public decision-making. However, there are fewer possibilities available to individual citizens. Most existing interactions tend to be unilateral and one-sided. They could be re-envisaged to encourage a more constructive two-way dialogue between citizens and state and enhance stakeholder participation.
There are a variety of ways to involve and engage citizens and stakeholders in public decision-making, including through access to information and data, open meetings, public consultations, open innovation, citizen science, civic monitoring, participatory budgeting and representative deliberative processes (see Table 3.2).
Source: OECD (2022[2]), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
In Jordan, several bodies have a role in fostering citizen and stakeholder participation, including MoPIC, the Ministry of Youth, the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Finance and MoDEE, among others. The Ministry of Political Development and Parliamentary Affairs (MoPPA) has overall responsibility for Jordan’s high-level commitment to interacting with CSOs and citizens (Box 3.6).
However, according to interviewees, MoPPA tends to have a more traditional view of citizen and stakeholder participation at present and could assume a more prominent position in encouraging novel and innovative ways towards more participation in public decision-making between electoral cycles. Overall, MoPPA could embrace its steering role by working with other public bodies, e.g. line ministries, to identify ways to mainstream citizen and stakeholder participation across public administration in Jordan. This could include implementing a diverse range of participatory mechanisms, such as town hall meetings, citizen assemblies, national dialogues, participatory budgeting, digital platforms and deliberative fora to facilitate consensus-building in policy areas such as education, gender equality and healthcare. Introducing and institutionalising such practices and initiatives can promote greater understanding between public bodies and those they serve. This effort should be conducted in collaboration with relevant ministries, public bodies and civil society organisations. Furthermore, MoPPA could design and implement educational and awareness-raising programmes, projects, and plans that target all segments of Jordanian society, with a particular emphasis on women and youth. These initiatives could underscore the value of citizen participation in public life and highlight the importance of active engagement in decision-making processes.
MoPPA notes that one of its duties is to support “the democratic march” of the country. Moreover, the ministry’s strategic plan includes references to educating all democratic groups about elections, political parties, constitutional amendments and ways to activate their role in public life. It also places a specific emphasis on the empowerment of women and youth.25 The ministry lists among its tasks raising awareness among citizens of their civic freedoms, encouraging “targeted dialogue” with stakeholders and citizens, inspiring citizens to get involved in political parties and building trust among all stakeholders (Government of Jordan, n.d.[81]).
Source: Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (n.d.[81]), Ministry of Political and Parliamentary Affairs,
https://portal.jordan.gov.jo/wps/portal/Home/GovernmentEntities/Ministries/Ministry/Ministry.
Building on the Tawasal platform as the main digital platform for e-participation
Creating channels for both in-person and digital forms of citizen and stakeholder participation is essential as they foster inclusivity and accessibility, allowing a diverse range of citizens to actively engage in policymaking and service design in the ways that best suit them. In 2020, 27 out of 32 surveyed OECD member countries (85%) had government-wide participation portals used by all ministries at the central/federal level to publish consultation and engagement opportunities (OECD, 2020[82]). The information and data generated by these platforms support evidence-based policymaking, ensuring that decisions align with citizens’ demands. Furthermore, digital platforms facilitate community building, enabling citizens to connect at the local, regional and national levels. If they keep pace with the technological transformation, these platforms can remain an effective and relevant way to engage citizens and stakeholders in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
Some good practices of centralised digital platforms for citizen and stakeholder participation include Brazil and Portugal (Box 3.7).
Portugal
Participa.gov is a platform to support participatory processes across public administration, allowing citizens to participate in public decision-making through accessible and reliable technologies. The platform was launched in 2021 and represents one of many online portals in Portugal that bring the government closer to citizens. The platform is a centralised and cross-cutting platform and aims to facilitate participatory processes at all levels of government. It also supports participatory budgeting processes by allowing citizens to submit proposals and make decisions through their vote using secure and safe technologies such as blockchain.
Brazil
Participa Mais Brasil represents a government-wide participatory portal that supports the harmonisation of public consultation across the administration. An initial version of this centralised portal for participation (Participa.br) was published in 2014 and gathered 371 communities with 31 756 users registered. In 2020, the platform became the present-day one-stop shop for all public bodies at the federal and subnational (states and municipalities) levels under the responsibility of the Special Secretariat for Social Coordination in the Secretary of Government (Secretaria de Governo or SEGOV). The platform allows the public to directly provide input to online participatory processes (consultations and polls) and get information from other in-person opportunities (public hearings and councils). As of 2022, public bodies have published 172 consultations and 44 opinion polls, gathering 34 063 contributions from 25 154 registered users. Significantly, public bodies can provide feedback for each public consultation published on the platform to those who responded or submitted their proposals or suggestions.
Source: Government of Portugal, (n.d.[83]), Participa.gov, https://participa.gov.pt/base/home; OECD (2023[84]), Civic Space Review of Portugal: Towards People-Centred, Rights-Based Public Services, https://doi.org/10.1787/8241c5e3-en; Brazilian Presidency (n.d.[85]), Participa Mais Brasil, https://www.gov.br/participamaisbrasil/pagina-inicial; OECD (2022[86]), Open Government Review of Brazil : Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f9009d4-en.
Jordan has made significant strides in this domain with several achievements of note in recent years. MoDEE has been at the forefront of these efforts (MoDEE, n.d.[87]). In 2023, the e-Participation Department was established in MoDEE within the Directorate of Strategies, Future and Entrepreneurship. The department aims to mainstream citizen and stakeholder participation across public administration, taking advantage of digital tools and platforms. As outlined in the OECD fact-finding mission, the objective is to promote a culture whereby the government views citizens as partners in achieving national objectives.
To achieve this aim, MoDEE developed the e-participation portal Tawasal (see Box 3.8), allowing citizens to comment on draft legislation, take part in public consultations, co-create policies and services and offer suggestions to public bodies. The ministry has already conducted broad consultations regarding the platform as part of the national commitments of the OGP in relation to enhancing citizen and stakeholder participation using electronic tools (OGP, 2023[58]). MoDEE, in partnership with MoPIC, also collaborated with the chambers of commerce, the private sector, international organisations, public bodies and CSOs representing women, youth and people with disabilities in the planning and development stages of the project.
Tawasal is a unified platform that consolidates all public consultations on legislation, policies, public projects, plans, strategies and services led by public bodies. It enables those interested to stay informed about government actions and activities and contribute proposals that help shape policies and services according to their needs.
The Tawasal platform has several key objectives:
Encourage public participation in the preparation of legislation and in public decision-making.
Improve the quality of public policies and services to meet the needs of citizens.
Promote transparency and build trust in the government.
Foster a participatory approach to evidence-based decision-making.
Enhance access to information and improve its quality.
The platform allows individuals to submit requests for access to information and follow up on their requests. It is integrated with the open data platform and is also linked to the Bekhedmetkom platform so individuals can submit inquiries, suggestions and complaints to public bodies. To gather user feedback, it also has a webpage for surveys and polls. The platform features a chatbot to answer questions and provide additional information.
Source: Government of Jordan (n.d.[88]), About the Tawasal Platform, https://www.tawasal.jo/About.
When there are many separate portals and websites for engaging with different public bodies, citizens can be unsure where to direct their queries or feedback. In this regard, MoDEE is exploring whether any other existing digital platforms and portals for feedback and engagement could lead to duplication and identify areas where functionalities could be merged or interconnected through the upcoming unified platform. Supporting MoDEE’s efforts to centralise existing platforms and portals is crucial. It will streamline communication with the public, enhance user experience, ensure that feedback is efficiently gathered, addressed and reported, and foster greater citizen and stakeholder participation across public administration.
The ministry also produces training materials and guidelines for public officials on e-participation. The guidance will include a code of conduct and general principles on citizen and stakeholder participation, all of which were discussed following workshops with CSOs and other non-governmental stakeholders. Undertaking consistent training and capacity building will be crucial to the success of the e-participation platform. MoDEE could also consider monitoring and evaluating the uptake of the platform and its use by public officials and users. In this regard, the ministry can also serve as a reference point for public officials who need further advice or assistance on the platform.
Digital divides can be a barrier for many, especially those lacking connectivity or digital literacy and information and communication technology skills. In this regard, there must be dedicated efforts to reach out to underrepresented or vulnerable groups. A diverse range of citizens and stakeholders could also be involved in testing and piloting the platform through, for example, focus groups and workshops to ensure that it is user-friendly and caters to all social demographics. Public spaces could also be offered to citizens so they can come and use the service in person, such as the Citizen Stops and Citizen Shops in Portugal (OECD, 2023[84]).
A legal or policy framework that renders some level of citizen and stakeholder participation obligatory or encourages and guides public officials in this regard could ensure sustainability and longevity throughout political cycles. In the medium to long term, Jordan could consider following the example of some countries, such as Romania (OECD, 2023[57]; 2023[56]), by having legal provisions that make it obligatory for public bodies to involve citizens and stakeholders at certain stages of the public decision-making process.
Unlocking the potential of national dialogues for national development plans
Many countries are beginning to experiment with ways to bring citizens closer to their reform agenda on a large scale, with one of the most influential and ambitious being a widespread national dialogue. Public officials increasingly recognise the benefits of such initiatives for enhancing citizens’ understanding of reforms and providing a platform for exchange, thereby fostering greater legitimacy and buy-in from citizens in the process. Proactively addressing any potential concerns identified in the early stages of the dialogue can help prevent conflicts and dissatisfaction and contribute to smoother implementation. The diverse perspectives in these discussions can also often lead to innovative solutions and the process demonstrates responsiveness, adaptability and commitment to meeting the population’s and government’s evolving expectations. Box 3.9 illustrates two good examples that could inspire a similar effort in Jordan.
Colombia
Colombia’s current National Development Plan (NDP) 2022-26 was adopted in 2023. During its development, 51 Binding Regional Dialogues were conducted, involving more than 250 000 citizens. Moreover, the NDP declares that “citizens will be involved in the management of the public, improving existing mechanisms, expanding the channels of dialogue and adapting them to the new citizen expressions, the diversity of the country’s population and its changing needs”.1 It also refers to the institutionalisation of these participatory practices, stating that “permanent exchange mechanisms will be defined”. This is not the first initiative of its kind in the country – from 2019 to 2020, the Grand National Conversation was established by the Presidency of the Republic to enable citizens to participate in roundtables and make proposals across a wide range of topics (Latinno, n.d.[89])
Morocco
In January 2020, the Commission spéciale sur le modèle de developpement (CSMD) launched a nationwide public consultation to all citizens on national development. Its aim was to gather the views, opinions and expertise of individuals, CSOs and the private sector through a multi-channel approach (Participo, 2021[90]). In addition to an online platform which posed the question “What is one thing you want to change about Morocco?”, the CSMD undertook 30 field visits to both urban and remote rural areas to ensure all communities had an opportunity to be involved. From January to December 2020, the CSMD received “over 10 000 written pages of contributions from 6 600 individuals and 165 organisations” (CSMD, 2021[91]).
In April 2021, the CSMD published a summary report on this “new development model” which is “designed by Moroccans, with Moroccans and for Moroccans”. It emphasises the role of access to information for a more ethical and accountable public life. The report also recognises that their approach has revealed great interest among the general population for more “participation, inclusion and empowerment” and a more significant role in public decision-making (CSMD, 2021[91]).
Note: 1. Information provided to the OECD as part of Colombia’s Implementation of Public Governance Post-Accession Monitoring Framework.
Source: Latinno (n.d.[89]), Grand National Conversation, https://latinno.net/en/case/5314/; Participo (2021[90]), “Morocco finds a new source of policy expertise - its own citizens”, https://medium.com/participo/morocco-finds-a-new-source-of-policy-expertise-its-own-citizens-b92358fa08ba; CSMD (2021[91]), Report of the Commission, https://csmd.ma/rapport-en.
In the medium to long term, Jordan could draw on these examples and consider hosting a nationwide dialogue in the development phases of national plans and strategies and important sectoral policy documents (e.g. education, climate, health). It is important to conduct such a dialogue in the early stages of policymaking to ensure opportunities for meaningful engagement and that the inputs gathered will be reflected in the final plan or strategy.
Considering the use of representative, deliberative processes and citizen’s assemblies, juries and panels
The representative, deliberative process is a process in which a broadly representative body of people weighs evidence, deliberates to find common ground and develops detailed recommendations on policy issues for public authorities (OECD, 2020[92]). As noted in the 2020 OECD report Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave, the use of these processes has been growing among public bodies from all levels of government since the 1980s (OECD, 2020[92]), with common examples including citizens’ assemblies, juries and panels.
Assembling ordinary citizens from all spheres of society to deliberate on complex policy dilemmas and develop collective proposals has become an increasingly attractive way for governments to push through difficult reforms while being assured public support (OECD, 2020[92]). In these processes, randomly selected citizens, making up a microcosm of a community, spend significant time learning and collaborating to develop informed collective recommendations for public officials. A representative deliberative process is most suited to addressing values-based dilemmas, complex problems requiring trade-offs and long-term questions beyond electoral cycles. In this sense, while such processes are costly in terms of time and resources, they have the potential to create significant value for those making decisions while empowering citizens and redefining their relationship with their government (Box 3.10) (OECD, 2020[92]).
France
France has experimented with several citizens’ assemblies over recent years. One notable example is the Citizens’ Convention on Climate (Convention Citoyenne pour le Climat), announced by the French president in 2019. The assembly brought together 150 randomly selected citizens tasked with proposing a series of measures “to achieve a minimum reduction of 40% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, in a spirit of social justice” (Citizens' Convention on Climate, n.d.[93]).
In 2022, the president of the republic announced a citizens’ convention on end of life under the auspices of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council, given its mandate for fostering citizen participation. The convention was asked “Is the end-of-life support framework adapted to the different situations encountered or should possible changes be introduced?” (ESEC, n.d.[94]). After 27 days of deliberation spread across 4 months, 184 randomly selected citizens from across France reached 92% consensus around 67 recommendations, which were submitted to the president (Democracy Next, 2023[95]).
Ireland
Ireland has held several citizens’ assemblies from 2016 to 2024, bringing citizens together to consider and discuss important policy issues in Ireland. A citizens’ assembly is usually composed of 99 randomly selected members of the public and 1 appointed chairperson. Members are selected to reflect wider society in terms of age, gender, socio-economic class and regional diversity.
When the assembly finishes considering each issue, it develops a series of draft recommendations and votes on each. It then reports to the Irish parliament with its final recommendations. The government’s next step is to respond to each recommendation and arrange a debate in parliament (Citizens Information Board, n.d.[96]).
Some of the topics discussed in previous years include how to respond to the challenges and opportunities of an ageing population, making the country a leader in tackling climate change, gender equality, responding to the loss of biodiversity, reducing harms caused by drug use and more.
Sources: Citizens’ Convention on Climate (n.d.[93]), The Citizens’ Convention on Climate, What Is It?, https://www.conventioncitoyennepourleclimat.fr/en/ (accessed on 12 September 2024); ESEC (n.d.[94]), Citizens’ Convention on the End of Life, https://www.lecese.fr/convention-citoyenne-sur-la-fin-de-vie; Democracy Next (2023[95]), “End of life citizens’ assembly concludes with 92% consensus, delivers recommendations to Macron”, https://www.demnext.org/news/democracy-in-france-end-of-life-citizens-assembly-concludes-with-92-consensus-delivers-recommendations-to-macron; Citizens Information Board (n.d.[96]), Citizens' Assembly, https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government-in-ireland/irish-constitution-1/citizens-assembly/#:~:text=A%20Citizens'%20Assembly%20is%20typically,member%20of%20a%20Citizens'%20Assembly.
It could be beneficial for Jordan to consider introducing deliberative mechanisms on sensitive or complex policy questions, whereby the government assembles ordinary citizens from all parts of society to discuss, reach a consensus and develop collective recommendations for decision-makers to consider.
Exploring the possibilities of focus groups, town hall meetings, roundtable discussions and other fora
Focus groups are a tool that allows public officials to determine citizens’ preferences or evaluate proposals and suggestions. Usually, they involve a group of citizens who are testing or experiencing services, products or solutions and are asked to provide their in-depth feedback. They usually comprise eight to ten people, gathered for a day or less (OECD, 2022[2]). Town halls or open meetings gather the public in face-to-face meetings with public officials to provide information and discuss topics of interest chosen beforehand. These processes are based on dialogue and debate rather than deliberation and do not necessarily result in formal inputs from citizens (OECD, 2022[2]). Other fora include seminars, conferences, roundtable discussions and workshops, which can be used to collect expert opinions and create opportunities to exchange ideas. They can happen on line or in person and involve anywhere from 20 to 150 participants, depending on whether a smaller group discussion is needed or if a larger group would serve to frame the debate and raise awareness (OECD, 2022[2]).
These initiatives should include special outreach efforts to underrepresented groups that could be prioritised (e.g. women, people with disabilities, migrants). Jordan could also commit to raising awareness and building capacity to undertake more frequent and effective participatory processes. This could include training public officials on the benefit of citizen and stakeholder participation and how to launch and implement such processes.
Fostering citizen and stakeholder participation in the budget process and expanding participatory budgeting
Participatory budgeting (PB) is beneficial as it empowers citizens to be involved directly in how the government allocates public funds. PB started in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in 1989 and has since expanded globally (OECD, 2022[86]). It is a process whereby citizens decide how to spend a budget segment, usually through project proposals (OECD, n.d.[97]). By involving residents in identifying priorities and distributing resources accordingly, PB fosters a sense of ownership among citizens, who actively contribute to shaping their communities. A common approach to introducing PB is for governments to identify aspects of their service delivery that could be delegated to PB, such as education, infrastructure or community services (OECD, 2022[86]).
At present, the General Budget Department (GBD) strives to improve citizen participation in the early stages of the budget throughout Jordan and improve the country’s score in the International Budget Partnership (IBP) Open Budget Survey. As of 2023, Jordan performed well, getting the highest score in the region regarding budget transparency of 60/100, with 100 being the best (see Chapter 2 on access to information). However, there is room for improvement regarding its score on public participation, which is currently 4/100 (IBP, 2023[98]). The IBP recommends that the GBD pilot new ways to engage the public in formulating the budget, allocating and following up on the implementation. It also encourages the GBD to actively engage with vulnerable and underrepresented communities, directly or indirectly, through CSOs (IBP, 2023[98]).
To improve its international standing, the GBD has already developed a citizen guide that presents a user‑friendly summary of the budget laws published on its website. It has also launched several awareness-raising campaigns on the budgetary process. At the same time, ministries could be encouraged to seek the views of a diverse range of stakeholders and citizens when considering budgetary allocations. The department and responsible public bodies (e.g. line ministries) could use the new Tawasal e‑participation platform to reach out to citizens and stakeholders and publicise opportunities to get involved in the budgetary process.
PB in Jordan represents a good example of collaboration between the government and CSOs.26 CSO Partners Jordan27 currently works alongside the government to implement PB at the municipal level, bringing together public officials and their communities across municipalities (Partners Jordan, n.d.[99]). After discussions between municipal decision-makers, stakeholders and citizens, a percentage of the municipal budget is allocated to the chosen priorities. Interviewees stated the amount granted is often around 15-18% of the overall budget. At present, PB is voluntary rather than obligatory for governorates, cities and municipalities in Jordan, whereas certain countries, such as Poland, have made it mandatory for areas with county status (OECD, 2021[100]).
In this context, the GBD could encourage all governorates and municipalities to undertake some form of PB, including involving more participants and allocating a greater share of the budget year on year. It could also consider making some form of PB mandatory in each governorate and municipality, to the extent possible, depending on their resources and capacity. To do so, the department could be granted additional human and financial resources to expand its efforts. Jordan could also consider establishing a participation unit or assigning a public official within the GBD responsible for involving citizens and stakeholders in the budget process and promoting PB, as did Egypt (Box 3.11).
Egypt has made significant efforts to entrench citizen participation in budgetary processes and undertake PB initiatives. The Ministry of Finance publishes several reports and documents to inform and familiarise citizens with public financial management and the state budget. Each year, the ministry issues a citizen’s and a child’s budget, simplified versions of the official enacted budget that are user‑friendly, written in plain language and adapted to the target audience (Egyptian Ministry of Finance, n.d.[101]). Its aim is to be “understood by as large of the segment of the population as possible” (IOPD, n.d.[102]).
Moreover, there is a high level of commitment from the Ministry of Finance, with the minister highlighting the benefits of citizen participation in the budget for transparency and good governance in 2022 (SIS, 2022[103]). The Ministry of Finance established a Fiscal Transparency and Citizen Engagement Unit for this purpose. According to its website, the unit aims to motivate citizens of all demographics in the economic and financial affairs of the country through transparency and access to information, interactive and gamified platforms and opportunities to get involved, all of which aim to “enhance citizens’ sense of belonging and consolidate the principle of active citizenship” (Egyptian Ministry of Finance, n.d.[104]).
Sources: OECD (n.d.[105]), Public Governance Review of Egypt, OECD Publishing, Paris; Egyptian Ministry of Finance (n.d.[101]), Egypt’s Citizen Budget Initiative Dashboard, https://budget.gov.eg/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A/; IOPD (n.d.[102]), From "Citizen Budget" to Participatory Budgeting in Egypt, https://oidp.net/en/content.php?id=1631; SIS (2022[103]), “Participatory budgeting aims to entrench citizen participation in state financial policy-making process”, https://sis.gov.eg/Story/171088/Maait-Participatory-budgeting-aims-to-entrench-citizen-participation-in-state-financial-policy-making-process?lang=en-us; Egyptian Ministry of Finance (n.d.[104]), Transparency and Citizen Engagement Unit, https://budget.gov.eg/en/ (accessed on 12 September 2024).
The GBD and other public bodies could thus benefit from learning from international experiences regarding participation in the budget and PB to build their capabilities in this field.
Over the last century, Jordan has introduced a range of legal, policy and institutional frameworks that enable citizens and stakeholders to provide feedback, submit complaints, shape policymaking and service design and delivery, and promote accountability across public administration. Today, the country has a unique opportunity to transform high-level commitment into concrete action through its current reform agenda. All ministries and many other public bodies have a key role to play in achieving the ambitious aims of the Public Sector Modernisation Roadmap (Government of Jordan, 2022[3]), the Economic Modernisation Vision (Government of Jordan, 2022[4]), the Report from the Royal Committee to Modernise the Political System (Government of Jordan, 2021[5]) and the associated government Executive Programme (2023‑25) (Government of Jordan, 2022[6]). Many public bodies are already making significant efforts to promote responsiveness and citizen and stakeholder participation across the public administration. The NCHR, OGCHR, HRU and others are essential in protecting and promoting the civic freedoms that allow citizens to participate in public life. MoDEE encourages greater citizen and stakeholder participation in the digital sphere by establishing a centralised platform for engaging with the public. MoPPA is steering the government’s commitment towards empowering individuals to participate in public decision-making. The GBD is making progress in mainstreaming participation in the budget and expanding PB. The Register of Societies, the Companies Control Department and the MoPIC Foreign Funding Unit are identifying ways to improve the enabling environment for CSOs.
Nevertheless, there is room for improvement to ensure that existing initiatives and practices collectively achieve more than the sum of their parts. First, Jordan can ensure that freedoms of expression, assembly and association are aligned with international standards, in legislation and in practice. In addition, developing a holistic strategy to protect press freedom and support media outlets and journalists could strengthen the information ecosystem, improving media literacy and combatting mis- and disinformation. Regarding an enabling environment for CSOs, there are opportunities to improve processes and procedures for registration, collect and publicise data and information on the sector, increase transparency around government funding and outline a vision that highlights the important role of CSOs in society. Jordan could consider clarifying the many channels available for complaints and feedback to enhance responsiveness across public administration. Lastly, there is significant potential to move towards more innovative forms of citizen and stakeholder participation in the country, for example, piloting a national dialogue, experimenting with representative, deliberative processes and exploring ways to introduce more focus groups, roundtables and town hall meetings into policymaking and service design and delivery.
Protecting civic freedoms and the information ecosystem to ensure that citizens and stakeholders can participate fully in public life
To safeguard freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association and guarantee press freedom, Jordan could:
Review the existing legal frameworks on freedom of expression, e.g. defamation, to ensure they align with international standards.
Create a working group or focus group on the Cybercrime Law to allow academics and CSOs, including human rights organisations and journalists, to discuss how to effectively implement the law. To minimise an excess of discretion in its application, the government could elaborate secondary guidelines via bylaws for public officials.
To protect the freedom of peaceful assembly, ensure that promising amendments made to the legal framework are reflected in practice.
To safeguard press freedom and strengthen the information ecosystem, consider developing a national strategy for supporting media and journalists as part of an overarching framework to strengthen the information ecosystem and combat mis- and disinformation.
Improving the enabling environment for CSOs
To streamline registration and operational processes and procedures for CSOs, promote transparency of funding and gain an overview of the sector, Jordan could:
Explore possibilities to reduce the time required for registration of societies and seek to introduce maximum deadlines for registration of non-profit companies.
Expand upon the existing government funding to provide diversified government support to societies and non-profit companies.
Promote the transparency of foreign funding by publicising and promoting their training materials and self-assessment tool. The Foreign Funding Unit could publish up-to-date statistics on the number of requests received for foreign funding, including approvals and denials. It could make additional efforts to clearly outline the national priorities for funding so that they are evident to CSOs before applying.
Raise awareness of the Takamul platform and continue to organise workshops and training on its use. Consider transforming the platform into a comprehensive one-stop shop where all CSOs can register, find information on other organisations and their activities, interact, apply for funding, provide financial reports and identify opportunities to participate in public decision-making.
Seek to equalise procedures between societies and non-profit companies and consider empowering an existing body or consider establishing one joint oversight body with a role to supervise, oversee and regulate the entire civil society sector (societies and non-profit companies) to align procedures.
Mainstreaming the involvement of CSOs in public decision-making will foster effective and evidence-based policies and services
To foster dialogue and informal and formal interactions on an ongoing basis, Jordan could:
Establish a cross-cutting permanent advisory body comprising public officials and CSOs or expand and empower a similar body with such a role and responsibility. In addition, assigning an office or officer within each ministry and/or public body responsible for engaging with CSOs could be useful.
Consider developing a strategy for CSOs which offers an overview of the current state of play, a vision for the CSO-government relationship, a commitment to collaborate with CSOs in public decision-making, and of how the government intends to support CSOs in the short, medium and long terms.
Enhancing responsiveness across public administration to build trust in government
To improve co‑operation among bodies with a mandate on civic freedoms and guiding public officials in responding to human rights complaints, Jordan could:
Support the NCHR in conducting training and capacity building for all relevant bodies, focusing on handling and classifying complaints pertaining to human rights. The relevant bodies for human rights co‑ordination, e.g. the NCHR, OGCHR and HRU, could support such an endeavour.
The Senate Committee, House Committee, NCHR, OGCHR and HRU could work more closely to advance the human rights agenda in Jordan. This could take the form of a network that meets regularly with a dedicated public official in each body that liaises with the others.
To streamline suggestions, compliments and complaints on policies and services, Jordan could:
Encourage public bodies to conduct a feedback session or focus group with citizens who have used the Bekhedmetkom platform to identify ways to optimise the platform. Jordan could also undertake recurring public communication campaigns to increase visibility around the platform. CSOs could also work as partners to support the government in further promoting this mechanism through different channels (e.g. social media, their websites, etc.).
Overall, Jordan could consider clarifying the pathways for feedback mechanisms so citizens can easily understand where to submit their suggestions, proposals and concerns (e.g. Bekhedmetkom platform, WhatsApp, email, hotlines, etc.).
Encouraging citizen and stakeholder participation in public decision-making for meaningful engagement
Jordan could embrace its potential to move towards more innovative forms of citizen and stakeholder participation in the country, including through:
MoPPA embracing its steering role by working with other public bodies, e.g. line ministries, to identify ways to mainstream citizen and stakeholder participation across the public administration in Jordan. This could include awareness-raising activities on the value and benefits of citizen and stakeholder participation.
Supporting MoDEE’s efforts to centralise existing platforms and portals through the Tawasal platform to streamline communication with the public, enhance user experience, ensure that feedback is efficiently gathered and addressed, and foster greater citizen and stakeholder participation across public administration. A diverse range of citizens and stakeholders could be involved in testing and piloting the platform. MoDEE could also consider monitoring and evaluating the uptake of the platform and its use by public officials and users.
Hosting a national dialogue in the future development phases of national plans and strategies and important sectoral policy documents (e.g. education, climate, health).
Introducing deliberative mechanisms on complex policy questions, whereby the government assembles ordinary citizens from all parts of society to deliberate, reach a consensus and develop collective recommendations for decision-makers to consider.
Supporting the work of the GBD in encouraging all governorates and municipalities to undertake some form of PB, including by involving a higher number of participants and allocating a greater share of the budget year on year.
Considering creating a participation unit or assigning a public official within the GBD responsible for involving citizens and stakeholders in the budget process and promoting PB.
References
[19] Article 19 (2023), Global Expression Report - Middle East and North Africa, https://www.globalexpressionreport.org/regions-middle-east-and-north-africa.
[78] Audit Bureau (n.d.), “About”, https://www.ab.gov.jo/En/Pages/Brief.
[85] Brazilian Presidency (n.d.), Participa Mais Brasil, https://www.gov.br/participamaisbrasil/pagina-inicial.
[93] Citizens’ Convention on Climate (n.d.), The Citizens’ Convention on Climate, What Is It?, https://www.conventioncitoyennepourleclimat.fr/en/ (accessed on 12 September 2024).
[96] Citizens Information Board (n.d.), Citizens’ Assembly, Citizens Information Board, Ireland, https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government-in-ireland/irish-constitution-1/citizens-assembly/#:~:text=A%20Citizens'%20Assembly%20is%20typically,member%20of%20a%20Citizens'%20Assembly.
[11] CIVICUS (n.d.), Enabling Environment National Assessment: Jordan, https://www.civicus.org/images/EENA_Jordan_En.pdf.
[10] CMEP (2009), “Civil society and public freedom in Jordan: The path of democratic reform”, Saban Center Working Papers, Center for Middle East Policy, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/07_jordan_jarrah.pdf.
[45] Companies Control Department (n.d.), About, https://ccd.gov.jo/Default/En.
[91] CSMD (2021), Report of the Commission, Commission spéciale sur le modèle de développement, https://csmd.ma/rapport-en (accessed on 31 July 2023).
[95] Democracy Next (2023), “End of life citizens’ assembly concludes with 92% consensus, delivers recommendations to Macron”, https://www.demnext.org/news/democracy-in-france-end-of-life-citizens-assembly-concludes-with-92-consensus-delivers-recommendations-to-macron.
[101] Egyptian Ministry of Finance (n.d.), Egypt’s Citizen Budget Initiative Dashboard, https://budget.gov.eg/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A/.
[104] Egyptian Ministry of Finance (n.d.), Transparency and Citizen Engagement Unit, https://budget.gov.eg/en/ (accessed on 12 September 2024).
[53] ESC (n.d.), Government of Jordan, Economic and Social Council of Jordan, https://www.esc.jo/Homeen.aspx.
[79] ESCWA (n.d.), “Case study on open government: Open data, participation, collaboration, citizen engagement and innovation in the public sector”, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, https://opengov.unescwa.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/Jo05-Platform-Ar.pdf.
[94] ESEC (n.d.), Citizens’ Convention on the end of life, French Economic, Social and Environmental Council, https://www.lecese.fr/convention-citoyenne-sur-la-fin-de-vie.
[12] ETF (2021), Civil Society Organisations and Human Capital Development, Jordan Country Report, European Training Foundation, https://www.etf.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2021-04/jordan_cso_reporten.pdf.
[49] FATF (2023), Jurisdictions under Increased Monitoring, Financial Action Task Force, https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/High-risk-and-other-monitored-jurisdictions/Increased-monitoring-october-2023.html.
[54] Finnish Ministry of Justice (n.d.), Advisory Board on Civil Society Policy (KANE), https://oikeusministerio.fi/en/advisory-board-on-civil-society-policy#:~:text=The%20Advisory%20Board%20for%20Civil,operating%20conditions%20for%20civil%20society.
[30] Freedom House (2023), Freedom on the Net 2023 - Jordan, https://freedomhouse.org/country/jordan/freedom-net/2023.
[64] GANHRI (n.d.), Our Members, Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, https://ganhri.org/membership/.
[63] GANHRI (n.d.), Paris Principles, Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, https://ganhri.org/paris-principles/.
[61] Government of Estonia (n.d.), A Strong Civil Society 2021-2024, https://www.siseministeerium.ee/tegevusvaldkonnad/sidus-uhiskond/kodanikuuhiskond.
[40] Government of Jordan (2023), Amendment of the Unified Regulation for the Provisions of Societies Law No. 25/2023, http://www.societies.gov.jo/ebv4.0/root_storage/ar/eb_list_page/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B8%D8%A7%D9%85_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%AF%D9%84.pdf.
[20] Government of Jordan (2023), Cybercrimes Law No. 17/2023, https://perma.cc/7RSM-6S4K.
[52] Government of Jordan (2023), Foreign Funding Approval Mechanism for Associations, Non-profit Companies, Cooperative Associations, and Unions, Issued under Prime Minister Official Letter number 1/14/4/69621 dated 21, https://www.mop.gov.jo/EBV4.0/Root_Storage/EN/EB_HomePage/%D8%A2%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%85%D9%88%D9%8A%D9%84_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%AC%D9%86%D8%A8%D9%8A_(English).pdf.
[47] Government of Jordan (2023), “Opening of a training workshop for civil society organizations on the “Takamul Platform” program”, https://www.societies.gov.jo/ar/modules/news.
[31] Government of Jordan (2023), Policy for Media and Government Communication, https://gc.gov.jo/AR/Pages/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%A9_%D9%84%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85_%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%B5%D8%A7%D9%84.
[4] Government of Jordan (2022), Economic Modernisation Vision: Unleashing Potential to Build the Future, https://www.jordanvision.jo/img/vision-en.pdf.
[6] Government of Jordan (2022), Economic Modernization Vision Executive Program 2023-2025, https://www.jordanvision.jo/img/Executive_Program_for_the_Economic_Modernisation_Vision_-_ENGLISH.pdf.
[3] Government of Jordan (2022), Public Sector Modernization Roadmap, https://govreform.jo/EBV4.0/Root_Storage/EN/EB_Info_Page/Road_map.pdf.
[5] Government of Jordan (2021), Report from the Royal Committee to Modernise the Political System, https://tayarwatani.jo/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Report-from-The-Royal-Committee-English-Translation-KAS-4.pdf.
[50] Government of Jordan (2019), Mechanism to Obtain Approval for Foreign Funding, https://ammannet.net/sites/default/files/2020-01/%D8%A7%D9%93%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%85%D9%88%D9%8A%D9%84%20%D9%86%D9%87%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%94%D9%8A2-%2016-12-2019%20%D9%86%D9%87%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%94%D9%8A.pdf.
[107] Government of Jordan (2016), General Regulation for Cooperative Societies no. 36, http://www.jcc.gov.jo/Pages/viewpage.aspx?pageID=157.
[28] Government of Jordan (2015), Audiovisual Law No. 26 on Audiovisual Media, World Intellectual Property Organization, https://cyrilla.org/fr/entity/kulyafb93ojwhymuj1wx0qkt9.
[67] Government of Jordan (2015), Comprehensive National Plan for Human Rights 2016-2025, https://moi.gov.jo/En/Pages/Comprehensive_National_Plan_for_Human_Rights.
[44] Government of Jordan (2010), Non-profit Companies Regulation No. 73/2010, https://www.ccd.gov.jo/Ar/Pages/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%86%D8%B8%D9%85%D8%A9.
[39] Government of Jordan (2010), Societies Regulation No. 57/2010, https://www.mosd.gov.jo/Ar/List/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%86%D8%B8%D9%85%D8%A9.
[38] Government of Jordan (2009), Law Amending the Law on Societies No. 22/2009, International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, https://www.icnl.org/research/library/jordan_22-2009-en/.
[37] Government of Jordan (2008), Societies Law No. 51/2008, International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, https://www.icnl.org/research/library/jordan_51-2008-en/.
[106] Government of Jordan (1997), Cooperative Law no. 18, http://www.jcc.gov.jo/Pages/viewpage.aspx?pageID=157.
[43] Government of Jordan (1997), The Companies Law No. 22/1997, World Intellectual Property Organization, https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/14955.
[88] Government of Jordan (n.d.), About the Tawasal Platform, https://www.tawasal.jo/About.
[70] Government of Jordan (n.d.), At Your Service - Bekhedmetkom Platform, https://portal.jordan.gov.jo/wps/portal/Home/CMU?lang=en.
[16] Government of Jordan (1952, amendments in 2011), Constitution, Constitute Project, https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Jordan_2011.
[46] Government of Jordan (n.d.), Database of Societies, http://www.societies.gov.jo/ar/pages/%D8%B3%D8%AC%D9%84_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%85%D8%B9%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA.
[17] Government of Jordan (1960, amended in 2011), Jordanian Penal Code, https://www.ahtnc.org.jo/sites/default/files/penal_code.pdf.
[41] Government of Jordan (n.d.), Jordanian Register of Societies, http://www.societies.gov.jo/ar/pages/%D8%B3%D8%AC%D9%84_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%85%D8%B9%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA.
[26] Government of Jordan (2007, amended in 2024), Law on Securing the Right to Information Access No. 47/2007, Centre for Law and Democracy, https://www.rti-rating.org/wp-content/uploads/Jordan.pdf.
[81] Government of Jordan (n.d.), Ministry of Political and Parliamentary Affairs, https://portal.jordan.gov.jo/wps/portal/Home/GovernmentEntities/Ministries/Ministry/Ministry%20of%20Political%20and%20Parliamentary%20Affairs/!ut/p/z0/fYxBCsIwEAC_kg_IllC9h1KKpZE2CtZcZNGmXYybkgbB35sXeBxmGLAwgmX80IyJAqPPfLOHuyrry75o1HGQpixUd6rqpjPtYCScJ4YW.
[27] Government of Jordan (1998, amended in 2012), Press and Publications Law No. 8, World Intellectual Property Organization, https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/11245.
[24] Government of Jordan (2004, amendments in 2011), Public Gatherings Law, https://www.moi.gov.jo/ebv4.0/root_storage/ar/eb_list_page/%D9%82%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%88%D9%86_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AC%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%A7%D8%AA.pdf.
[42] Government of Jordan (n.d.), Registration of Societies and Social Organizations, https://portal.jordan.gov.jo/wps/wcm/connect/gov/egov/government+ministries+_+entities/ministry+of+social+development/services/registration+of+societies+and+social+organizations.
[34] Government of Jordan (n.d.), Your Right to Know / Haggak Tiraf, http://www.haggak.jo/.
[83] Government of Portugal (n.d.), Participa.gov - Portal de Participação Cívica, https://participa.gov.pt/base/home.
[59] Government of Slovenia (2018), Non-governmental Organisations Act (ZNOrg), Government of Slovenia, https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MJU/SNVO/ENG/Act-On-Non-Governmental-Organisations-ZNOrg.docx.
[60] Government of Slovenia (n.d.), Non-governmental Organisations, https://www.gov.si/en/topics/non-governmental-organisations/#:~:text=The%20Non%2DGovernmental%20Organisations%20Act,association%20in%20the%20public%20interest.
[76] Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (n.d.), The Judicial Branch, http://www.kinghussein.gov.jo/government4.html.
[71] House of Representatives of Jordan (n.d.), About, https://www.representatives.jo/Default/Ar.
[74] House of Representatives of Jordan (n.d.), House Committee for Public Freedom and Human Rights, https://www.representatives.jo/Ar/pages/Committees?SessionID=3&CouncilID=&Sname=%u0627%u0644%u062f%u0648%u0631%u0629+%u0627%u0644%u0639%u0627%u062f%u064a%u0629+%u0627%u0644%u062b%u0627%u0644%u062b%u0629.
[22] HRW (2023), “Repression undermines Jordan’s reform narrative”, Human Rights Watch, https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/08/23/repression-undermines-jordans-reform-narrative.
[98] IBP (2023), Jordan in the Open Budget Survey, International Budget Partnership, https://internationalbudget.org/open-budget-survey/country-results/2023/jordan.
[21] ICNL (2023), “Legal analysis of Jordan’s draft Cybercrimes Law”, Unpublished, International Center for Not-for-Profit Law.
[48] ICNL (n.d.), Civic Freedom Monitor: Jordan, International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, https://www.icnl.org/resources/civic-freedom-monitor/jordan.
[102] IOPD (n.d.), From “Citizen Budget” to Participatory Budgeting in Egypt, International Observatory of Participatory Democracy, https://oidp.net/en/content.php?id=1631.
[77] JIACC (n.d.), About, Integrity and Anti-corruption Commission, https://www.jiacc.gov.jo/Default/en.
[23] Jordan Times (2023), “King says Jordan committed to political, media pluralism; directs government to review access to information bill”, https://jordantimes.com/news/local/king-says-jordan-committed-political-media-pluralism-directs-government-review-access.
[69] Jordan Times (2023), “NCHR, government, CSOs prepare for Jordan’s 4th periodic human rights review”, https://jordantimes.com/news/local/nchr-govt-csos-prepare-jordans-4th-periodic-human-rights-review.
[32] Jordan Times (2023), “Prime Minister approves Economic and Social Council to manage dialogue on media policy”, https://jordantimes.com/news/local/pm-approves-economic-and-social-council-manage-dialogue-media-policy.
[89] Latinno (n.d.), Grand National Conversation, https://latinno.net/en/case/5314/.
[35] Ministry of Culture (n.d.), Our Trust, https://www.culture.gov.jo/node/66435.
[87] MoDEE (n.d.), About, Ministry of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship, https://www.modee.gov.jo/Default/En.
[65] NCHR (n.d.), About, National Center for Human Rights, https://www.nchr.org.jo/.
[66] NCHR (n.d.), Annual Reports, National Center for Human Rights, https://www.nchr.org.jo/ar/%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%B3%D9%86%D9%88%D9%8A%D8%A9/.
[25] OECD (2024), Facts not Fakes: Tackling Disinformation, Strengthening Information Integrity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d909ff7a-en.
[8] OECD (2024), Practical Guide for Policymakers on Protecting and Promoting Civic Space, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6c908b48-en.
[84] OECD (2023), Civic Space Review of Portugal: Towards People-Centred, Rights-Based Public Services, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8241c5e3-en.
[57] OECD (2023), Civic Space Review of Romania, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f11191be-en.
[56] OECD (2023), Open Government Review of Romania, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ff20b2d4-en.
[62] OECD (2022), Building Trust to Reinforce Democracy: Main Findings from the 2021 OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions, Building Trust in Public Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b407f99c-en.
[2] OECD (2022), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
[86] OECD (2022), Open Government Review of Brazil : Towards an Integrated Open Government Agenda, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f9009d4-en.
[7] OECD (2022), The Protection and Promotion of Civic Space: Strengthening Alignment with International Standards and Guidance, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d234e975-en.
[100] OECD (2021), Better Governance, Planning and Services in Local Self-Governments in Poland, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/550c3ff5-en.
[36] OECD (2021), Citizens’ Voice in Jordan: The Role of Public Communication and Media for a More Open Government, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/da85277c-en.
[55] OECD (2021), Civic Space Scan of Finland, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f9e971bd-en.
[108] OECD (2021), DAC Recommendation on Enabling Civil Society in Development Co-operation and Humanitarian Assistance, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-5021.
[92] OECD (2020), Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/339306da-en.
[82] OECD (2020), Open Government Dashboard, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/governance/open-government-dashboard/.
[1] OECD (2017), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438 (accessed on 23 August 2021).
[105] OECD (n.d.), OECD Public Governance Reviews: Egypt, OECD Publishing, Paris, forthcoming.
[97] OECD (n.d.), Supporting Open Government in Jordan at the Local Level, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/open-government-and-citizen-participation.html.
[58] OGP (2023), Jordan Action Plan Review 2021-2025, Open Government Partnership, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/jordan-action-plan-review-2021-2025/.
[51] OGP (2018), Jordan’s Fourth National Action Plan 2018-2020, Open Government Partnership, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Jordan_Action-Plan_2018-2020.pdf.
[13] OGP (n.d.), Jordan, Open Government Partnership, https://www.opengovpartnership.org/members/jordan/.
[90] Participo (2021), “Morocco finds a new source of policy expertise - its own citizens”, https://medium.com/participo/morocco-finds-a-new-source-of-policy-expertise-its-own-citizens-b92358fa08ba (accessed on 31 July 2023).
[99] Partners Jordan (n.d.), About Partners Jordan, https://www.partners-jordan.org/index.php/index/index/about/.
[9] Phenix Center for Economic and Informatics Studies (2021), Shrinking Civic Space in Jordan: Concerning Developments Before and After COVID-19, http://csopartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/CPED-Report-on-Civic-Space-in-Jordan-Before-and-After-COVID-28-Jan.21.pdf.
[75] PSD (n.d.), Transparency and Human Rights Bureau, Jordanian Public Security Directorate, https://psd.gov.jo/en-us/transparency-and-human-rights-bureau/.
[29] RSF (2023), RSF World Press Freedom Index - Jordan, Reporters Without Borders, https://rsf.org/en/country/jordan.
[72] Senate of Jordan (n.d.), About, https://senate.jo/.
[73] Senate of Jordan (n.d.), Senate Committee for Public Freedom and Human Rights, https://senate.jo/ar/page/%D9%84%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%B3-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%85%D8%A9.
[103] SIS (2022), “Participatory budgeting aims to entrench citizen participation in state financial policy-making process”, Egyptian State Information Service, https://sis.gov.eg/Story/171088/Maait-Participatory-budgeting-aims-to-entrench-citizen-participation-in-state-financial-policy-making-process?lang=en-us (accessed on 1 August 2023).
[18] UN (2011), General Comment No. 34, United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/gc34.pdf.
[68] UN (n.d.), Universal Periodic Review - Jordan, United Nations Human Rights Council, https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/upr/jo-index.
[33] UNDP (2023), Unravelling the Web of False Information in Jordan, United Nations Development Programme, https://www.undp.org/jordan/blog/unravelling-web-false-information-jordan.
[14] WJP (2022), Rule of Law Index, World Justice Project, https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/.
[80] World Bank (2022), “Grievance mechanism (GRM) assessment and strengthening: Inclusive, transparent, and climate responsible investments program-for-results”, Unpublished, World Bank Group.
[15] World Bank (2022), Voice and Accountability: Estimate - Jordan, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VA.EST?end=2022&locations=JO&name_desc=true&start=2016.
← 1. CSOs are an organisational representation of civil society and include all not-for-profit, non-state, non‑partisan, non-violent and self-governing organisations outside of the family, in which people come together to pursue shared needs, ideas, interests, values, faith and beliefs, including formal, legally registered organisations as well as informal associations without legal status but with a structure and activities (OECD, 2021[108]).
← 2. For the purpose of this chapter, unless otherwise explicitly stated, the term citizen is meant as any inhabitant of a particular place and not a legally recognised national of a state.
← 3. Stakeholders are defined as any interested and/or affected party, including: individuals, regardless of their age, gender, sexual orientation, religious and political affiliations; and institutions and organisations, whether governmental or non-governmental, from civil society, academia, the media or the private sector (OECD, 2017[1]).
← 4. Jordan joined the OGP as a member in 2011.
← 5. In 2023, the commission granted 3 licenses to radio broadcasting and rebroadcasting stations, renewed the licenses of 9 radio broadcasting stations and 3 satellite broadcasting stations, granted license renewals to 6 television broadcasting stations, bringing the total to 39 satellite stations. It also granted licenses to 35 electronic news publications, bringing the total number licensed to date to 214 electronic news publications. Lastly, it renewed 18 paper press publications licenses, so that the total number reached 18 publications. This information was shared by the Ministry of Government Communication, March 2024.
← 6. Information shared by the Ministry of Government Communication, March 2024.
← 7. Misinformation can be defined as “false or inaccurate information that is shared unknowingly and without the intention of deceiving the public” while disinformation is usually defined as “false, inaccurate, or misleading information deliberately created, presented and disseminated to harm a person, social group, organisation or country” (OECD, 2024[25]).
← 8. Information shared by the Ministry of Government Communication, March 2024.
← 9. Jordan also has many co‑operative societies (1 499 as of 2021), which are registered in accordance with the provisions of Cooperative Law No. 18 (Government of Jordan, 1997[106]) and Regulation No. 36 (Government of Jordan, 2016[107]). Co‑operative societies are subject to the supervision and control of the Jordan Cooperative Corporation and are classified according to their activities, for example multi-purpose co‑operative societies, consumer co‑operatives, co‑operative societies, professional co‑operative societies, housing co‑operative societies, co‑operative societies for mutual benefit, craft co‑operative societies and women’s co‑operative societies, among others. Co‑operative societies conduct activities to support communities and can apply for foreign funding. However, they differ from societies and non-profit companies because they can engage in profitable activities and the profit can be distributed to their members.
← 10. According to the Societies Law, “society” refers to “any legal personality composed of a group of people not less than seven and is registered in consistency with the provisions of this law to provide services or undertake activities on voluntary basis without intending to make or share profit, to realise any benefit for any of its members or for any specific person, or to achieve any political goals that enter into the scope of the work and activities of political parties in accordance with the legislation in force” (Government of Jordan, 2009[38])
← 11. According to the Non-Profit Companies Regulation, a non-profit company means the company is registered in accordance with the provisions of the law and regulation and does not aim to achieve any profit. If it does earn any revenue, it should be spent to pursue and fulfil the objectives of the company as it is not permissible to distribute it to any of the staff or shareholders (Government of Jordan, 2010[44]).
← 12. Information shared by the Register of Societies, January 2024.
← 13. The selection criteria consider the experience and expertise of an organisation in voluntary and charity works as well as factors such as diversity of gender, religion and geographical region of operation.
← 15. In certain cases, they can apply for sales tax exemption at the Income and Sales Tax Department. If an international donor is exempted from sales tax, the exemption extends to the grant they provided to a CSO or non-profit company.
← 16. The Ministries of Social Development; of Culture; of Tourism and Antiquities; of Interior; of Environment; of Political and Parliamentary Affairs; of Health; of Agriculture; of Justice; of Water and Irrigation; of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs; of Digital Economy and Entrepreneurship; of Planning and International Cooperation; of Industry, Trade and Supply.
← 17. MoPIC provided funding to societies from 2002 to 2020.
← 18. Jordan was on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) “grey list” until October 2023, meaning it was one of the countries under increased monitoring as it actively worked to “address strategic deficiencies in their regimes to counter money laundering, terrorist financing, and proliferation financing” (FATF, 2023[49]). Given the country’s significant progress in this area, from October 2023, Jordan is no longer subject to the FATF’s increased monitoring process (FATF, 2023[49]).
← 19. As of November 2023, training had already taken place in four governorates.
← 20. In 2022, 237 societies and non-profit companies were granted approval for 370 projects.
← 21. Information shared by governmental stakeholders during the OECD fact-finding mission.
← 22. The Foreign Funding Committee is required to provide justification to the CSO when rejecting an application and the CSO can object to the rejection in writing within two days.
← 23. In October 2023, the charity sector and non-profit companies received the highest percentage of foreign funds, to a total value of JOD 47 million.
← 24. The Lower House Committee keeps a record of all complaints submitted, the type of complaint, the public body implicated by the complaint and the action taken to solve the issue.
← 25. PowerPoint presentation on the strategic plan shared by governmental stakeholders during the OECD fact-finding mission.
← 26. The decentralisation process in Jordan supported a participatory approach by allocating financial ceilings to the governorates annually and encouraging them to involve citizens in determining their needs through the elected governorate councils.
← 27. Partners Jordan was established in 2005 and is a member of an international network comprised of over 22 Partners Network centres across the globe. It aims to build capacity among CSOs, support mediation and peacebuilding in Jordan, and promote good governance, social accountability and citizen participation in sustainable development in Jordan. See more at Partners Jordan (n.d.[99]).