Jordanian clampdown poses acid test of will to defend freedoms

Date: 03/12/1998

By Simon Taylor

ON 1 September this year, the Jordanian authorities passed a new press law which, according to human rights campaigners, “imposes a sweeping regime of censorship and grants the government extensive control over independent newspapers”.

A report drawn up for the Copenhagen-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) explains how amendments to Jordan's 1993 press and publications law will allow the government to close newspapers indefinitely and ban foreign publications from entering the country if they offend the royal family, the armed forces or the heads of other Arab states.

While this restriction on press freedom may be a lesser moral evil than other abuses of democratic rights in the Middle East, the case raises the core question at the heart of the debate over how the EU can promote human rights: which way is better, the carrot or the stick?

Jordan is one of the 12 Mediterranean countries which signed up to the 1995 Barcelona Declaration, which aims to foster peace and prosperity in the region. That declaration commits the 15 EU member states and the 12 Mediterranean signatories to respect democratic principles and fundamental human rights.

In theory, the EU has a range of options available to it if a country fails to meet its commitments, ranging from delaying development aid to a full-scale trade boycott. But campaigners argue that the Union often fails to exert the kind of pressure needed to bring about a real improvement in human rights.

An activist at EMHRN quoted the example of Tunisia, where there had been “grave violations' of human rights but the EU scarcely raised the issue at an Association Council meeting with Tunisian officials.

The organisation points out that when the Union does try to include stronger commitments on the protection of human rights in agreements, this is often opposed by countries which signed up to the declaration themselves.

According to Lotte Leicht of Human Rights Watch, one way out of the impasse would be for the EU to stop seeing human rights as a 'soft issue' which can be put on the back burner when more important commercial interests are at stake.

Leicht argues that issues like the rule of law, security and economic links should not be seen as separate subjects. “Trade ties are best taken care of in an environment guided by the rule of law,” she maintains.

Leicht believes that EU governments have already recognised the wisdom of the approach she advocates, but have not yet put it into practice.

In order for the EU's attempts to foster human rights to be credible, it has to confront abuses where they happen, or risk its stance being undermined by an apparent lack of willingness to tackle uncomfortable issues.