The government excuses itself from these obvious human rights violations by claiming it is against Jordanian law (even though the law contradicts the constitution) or that censorship is necessary for the purpose of national security. One such instance was in the case of Nahed Hattar who was a well known writer who published an anti-ISIS cartoon that depicted God’s face, which is against Islamic teaching, leading to his arrest. Hattar was charged with “inciting sectarian strife” because of his cartoon even though it was intended as a criticism of ISIS, but was later murdered outside the courthouse where he was to stand trial. Other cases in which journalists were arrested were those of Ghazi al-Mrayat and Atef Joulani, the former being charged “with exposing the country to hostile acts, exposing the country’s citizens to revengeful and aggressive acts, and harming relations with a foreign country” while the latter was charged with “defaming an official body,” but they released and not convicted of any crimes. Even though neither was convicted, these examples showcase how the government attempts to censor speech and what they consider to be dangerous speech, such as simply questioning the actions of the …show more content…
Jordan is not a unique case in this aspect and its people may have considerably more rights than those of Saudi Arabia, but a human rights violation is a human rights violation regardless of its extent. Censorship has gotten to the point where schoolteachers such as Ali al-Malkawi who made a Facebook post “criticizing Arab and Islamic inaction in protecting Burmese Muslims” only to be charged with “harming relations with a foreign country.” Not only does this show how the government aims to eliminate all public criticism, but it also brings attention to the lack of privacy, which is an entirely other matter. If those who are meant to educate the future leaders of a nation are being prosecuted for criticizing the government, it certainly creates an ominous outlook for