One cannot help but wonder whether the people who write
Jordan’s human-centric social laws have hearts, or whether they fully grasp the
concept of human dignity, sanctity of the body, and children’s right to
protection and safety.
اضافة اعلان
Do our legislators understand the lifelong effects of
childhood trauma? More crucially, do they have an inkling of what it means for
an adult to circulate pornographic materials of a child over the internet,
causing innocent children irreversible scars and an undying sense of shame that
they will have to endure their whole lives?
Apparently not!
Whoever wrote Article 9 of the Jordanian Cybercrime Law must
see no value in a child’s right to dignity, let alone understand the devastating
effects of their loss of a healthy sense of self-worth, which happens to be one
of the intangible building blocks of a healthy society.
The “experts” who write our laws are clearly oblivious to
the suffering of minors who will have to find a way to forget (or block) the
fact that their indecent photographs were once circulated over the net and
might still be out there on some pervert’s computer, or in a dark corner of the
web.
Clause A of Article 9 limits the punishment of sexual
predators who circulate online pornographic materials containing underage
children to a “minimum of three months’ imprisonment and no more than one
year”. There is also a fine of “at least JD300 and no more than JD5,000” for the same crime.
To translate, pedophiles and perverts who get hold of a
child’s images and commit the heinous crime of splashing them all over the
internet –— with malice or intent — will go to prison for a maximum of one year
only (that is if they get reported or found out in the first place).
That is a measly one year for causing a lifetime of pain,
shame and possible mental health illnesses like anxiety and depression to an
unsuspecting child.
One year for destroying a little girl’s or boy’s ability to
grow into productive adults, stripped of their ability to develop the
self-confidence and psychological resilience they need to face the challenges
of life. One year for emotionally scarring the psyche of an underage
preschooler, tween or teen, and forcing them to carry the lasting stigma of
having been publicly violated before an audience of thousands, if not millions,
of perverts over the vast cyberspace.
Another ethical problem in Article 9 – and all three clauses
under it – is the stipulation of a “fine” that normally goes to the state,
instead of some level of “compensation” to help the victim or victims stitch
their lives back together.
What happens if the victim of child pornography or
pornographic actions that victimize the “psychologically or mentally disabled”
(as stipulated in Clauses B and C of Article 9) is identifiable or happens to
live on Jordanian soil? How come the injured and oppressed get zero
compensation for their pain? And why is there no mention of some form of
psychological or social support from a qualified mental health professional to
help them with the emotional torments that come from enduring this type of
horrific experience?
Furthermore, Article 9 includes no mention of other
practical steps that Jordanian law enforcement bodies need to take to delete
any and all audio, written or visual content that portray the victim in a
compromising light.
To clean up the web of child pornography, Jordan needs to
develop specific mechanisms (including templates and procedures) that guarantee
the victims’ “right to be forgotten”, which is currently guaranteed under the EU “General Data Protection Regulation” (GDPR).
In a way, this right is surprisingly mentioned in the
“Personal Data Protection Law of 2021”, which is Jordan’s long-sought privacy
bill that the Prime Ministry got around to send to Parliament in late January
for ratification. The bill does not specifically call for the “right to be
forgotten”, and does not mention victims of online pornography per se, but
several articles and clauses in the draft law point to Jordanians’ ability to
ask for their personal data to be altered or removed from apps and online
platforms.
The Lower House and the Senate are in effect failing their ... duty of truly scrutinizing the laws that the government sends their way for further study and reflection.
Rewriting the law to place more emphasis on victims of
cybercrimes could help the attorney general, or any Jordanian citizen, remove
all kinds of compromising materials pertaining to children, disabled
individuals and victims of illicit actions from social media platforms and
websites owned by companies and individuals inside and outside Jordan.
This said, no one knows the criteria by which legislators writing
our laws are appointed. But judging from the wording and rationale in Article 9
of the Jordanian Cybercrime Law, it certainly is not about empathy, and it
certainly is not about love.
Our lawmakers and senators are also culpable for passing
laws that lack insight and heart. The Lower House and the Senate are in effect
failing their national and patriotic duty of truly scrutinizing the laws that
the government sends their way for further study and reflection.
Parliament is supposed to be the “last frontier” and the
“safety valve” that protects society from badly written laws. Yet, since the
dynamic between government and Parliament has historically been corrupt (with
the exchange of trivial favors being part of its unethical dynamic), our
political system is virtually broken. This, in turn, has broken our social
justice system, allowing predators to roam freely in our society, at the
expense of helpless victims and women and children who have been suffering
decades of marginalization and systematic alienation.
Lawyers, judges and legal experts writing the laws that
touch the lives of real women, men and children must first meet the victims of
the crimes they are drafting laws for. Without firsthand experience and a real
understanding of what a sexually exploited child goes through, our legislators
will continue to write laws that are void of empathy and heart.
The writer has reported on the environment, worked in the
public sector as a communications officer, and
served as managing editor of a business magazine, spokesperson for a
humanitarian INGO, and as head of a PR agency.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
.jpg)
.jpg)
