Chaotic discussions, what is the replacement?

The country is witnessing an unprecedented interest — even a race — within official institutions, searching for the perfect recipe concerning the national discussion of political and economic reform.اضافة اعلان

Minutes after the government formed a ministerial committee to revise and review the electoral and party laws, Senate President Faisal Al Fayez launched an open discussion with party officials, social leaders, and tribal heads to discuss the future of Jordan’s elections.

Earlier, the House of Representatives also launched an open discussion as well. However the House backtracked, citing administrative and organizational reasons. If the House does not find another path, however, it will be tempted to relaunch its discussion efforts.

The government is still in discussion with itself in regards to electoral laws, but it might adopt a different, nuanced approach with expanded perspectives.

The Senate’s discussion will be long and will entail a plethora of propositions from multiple tribal social and political figures within each governorate in the Kingdom. It is unclear what the outcome of such vague discussions would be! Could the Senate form a national accord that addresses all shared perspectives and recommendations? Or are we participating in hearing sessions with information left at the discretion of executive officials? It would not be surprising if suddenly this discussion ceased to exist, yielding nothing, since the chaos within decision-making halls is common due to the lack of national guidelines to steer the reform process.

We all agree on the urgency for a serious national discussion, but differ on how the discussion should be held. We still hold to the concept of quid pro quo rather than relying on merit and that, in turn, increases our focus on our differences rather than similarities, which devalues the entire concept.

Historically successful reforms have been achieved when its under direct Royal patronage. The biggest examples could be the National Accord Committee, the Royal Committee for Constitutional Amendments, and many more. Thus, in order to avoid running in parallel lines and unfruitful discussions, I suggest that we follow the Royal Discussion Papers as we all are united under the Throne. This national discussion should solidify the presence of the Throne as a protector of the country and the Constitution, and focus on the concepts of integrity, equality, civil duties, and justice. An authentic discussion would be a new mark to head the second centennial of the Kingdom.

Read more opinions