In 2011, following the Arab Spring uprisings, the Jordanian parliament debated constitutional amendments recommended by the Royal Commission to address calls for reform. Among the proposed changes was the addition of “gender” to the sixth article of the constitution, which prohibits discrimination in citizens’ rights and duties. However, this proposal was ultimately rejected, causing concern among human rights organizations and women’s groups. Many believed that the rejection was politically motivated and related to the denial of nationality rights to the children of Jordanian women married to non-Jordanians.
Ten years after the rejection of the proposed amendment, the parliament witnessed a new round of controversy related to the discussion of constitutional amendments recommended by the Royal Commission to modernize the political system. One recommendation was to add “Jordanian women” to the title of the second chapter of the Constitution, to read “the rights and duties of Jordanian men and women”. Opponents believed that the addition of these words could create problems in the future, namely that this amendment would lead to granting women the right to confer their nationality to their children born to a non-Jordanian father, and claiming equality in personal status laws.
Despite heated debates, the addition of “Jordanian women” to the constitution was eventually approved. However, the government sought to reassure opponents that this would not affect nationality or personal status laws. For instance, the Minister of State for Political and Parliamentary Affairs, Mussa Al-Maaytah, confirmed that any changes to nationality laws must be made through parliamentary procedures.
How does Jordan's Nationality Law perpetuate discrimination?
The Jordanian Nationality Law, in its third article, still maintains that Jordanian nationality is granted to “whoever was born to a father who has the Jordanian nationality,” “whoever was born in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan to a mother who holds Jordanian nationality and a father of unknown nationality or stateless, or which descent to his father has not been legally proven,” and “whoever was born in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of unknown parents.” Additionally, Article six of the law states that “the children of a Jordanian man are Jordanians wherever they are born,” while the law only allows foreign Jordanian wives to obtain Jordanian nationality if they express their desire to do so in writing.
In essence, Jordanian law treats women who marry foreign men differently from men who marry foreign women. While men are permitted to confer their nationality and grant their spouses the right to obtain nationality, Jordanian women are not granted the same right, except in cases where the father is unknown or stateless or when the child’s parental lineage is not established.
Flawed solution to Jordan's nationality discrimination
According to Jordanian lawyer and activist Hala Ahed Deeb, the Nationality Law has been a long-standing issue for the Jordanian feminist movement and human rights advocates. In 1976, the late lawyer Emily Bisharat, president of the Women’s Union in Jordan (now known as the Jordanian Women’s Union), submitted a proposal to the Council of Ministers calling for amendments to legislation that discriminates against women. The Nationality Law was one of 11 laws targeted in the proposal. Despite ongoing campaigns to amend the law, Jordanian women are still denied the right to confer their nationality to their children born to non-Jordanian fathers. These campaigns include the “My mother is Jordanian and her nationality is a right for me” campaign and the “My nationality is the right of my family” coalition, which includes activists and representatives from civil society institutions who support this right. However, advocates argue that the solutions proposed so far are flawed.
Rami Al-Wakil, the current coordinator of “My mother is Jordanian and her nationality is a right for me” campaign, says that the campaign was launched by the late activist Nima Al-Habashna, who was also married to a non-Jordanian, because of “the disparities between the children of Jordanian women and the children of Jordanian men; there has become a flagrant discrimination between them in work, education, obtaining a driver’s license and many aspects, or more correctly, the children of Jordanian women have been treated as expatriates to the country”.
Between 2008 and 2014, the campaign carried out about 68 sit-ins in front of the Council of Ministers, the Parliament and the Ministry of Interior. It was able to hold meetings with MPs and officials to convey the voice of Jordanian women’s children and clarify the difficulties they face in their daily lives.
Following popular pressure and parliamentary movements led by a bloc known as “The Parliamentary Initiative”, the government issued a decision in November 2014 stating that the children of Jordanian women would be granted identification cards enabling them to access education, healthcare, the right to property and residence, work and investment opportunities. Estimates at the time indicated that 85,000 Jordanian women were married to non-Jordanians.
The decision stipulated that the child of a Jordanian woman should be treated as a Jordanian regarding access to primary and secondary education, and treated as a Jordanian in terms of other social benefits until the age of eighteen. They are also given priority in professional sectors reserved exclusively for Jordanians, after Jordanian nationals. They were initially exempted from work permit fees when these were required, though the work permit requirement was completely canceled by an amendment toArticle 12 of the Jordanian Labor Law in 2019, which stipulates that “Children of Jordanian women married to non-Jordanians residing in the Kingdom are exempted from obtaining work permits provided for in paragraphs (a) and (b) of same article”.
Al-Wakil considers the biggest change for the children of Jordanian women is in access to work because “the law provided for this, not the [Government] decision ( on benefits),” while there are many gaps pertaining to areas that the decision does not tackle. For example, the children of Jordanian women were initially exempted from work permit fees, but they were not exempted from the so-called “stamp fees” required to obtain the permit, until another decision by the Prime Minister exempted them from this as well. The basic decision also stipulates that the children of Jordanian women are equal to Jordanian citizens who are uninsured in the health sector until the age of eighteen, but what about this right after this age?
While government departments, such as the Licensing Department, are supposed to treat the card given to the children of Jordanian women as a personal identification document, many of these children complain that the Department still requests their passports and are not satisfied with the identification card. Al-Wakil faced this problem personally, when he applied to enroll his daughter in school in 2019, years after the entry into force of the facilities decision. He explained, “Unfortunately, the school asked me for a passport. I have a passport, but I do not want to give it to you because it is not your right to ask for it from me. I have the identification card issued for the children of Jordanian women, and I want you to treat me as the son of a Jordanian, don’t treat me as a stranger”.
Al-Wakil says that perhaps the children of a Jordanian mother might perceive these benefits as efficient, that the benefits make them actually equal to Jordanians, in terms of access to university education for example and in daily life to a certain extent; however, this perception quickly dissipates when they encounter a new matter, only to discover that they are not Jordanian. If they want, for example, to own property, they discover that the ownership conditions that apply to them differ from those applied to Jordanians and they are not exempt from registration fees like Jordanian citizens. They even need security clearance from the Ministry of Interior.
Zainab Abu Tabikh, a Jordanian woman married to a non-Jordanian and the mother of five children, agrees with Al-Wakil; she believes that the decision to grant facilities has alleviated some difficulties, for example, in school education. But it has not solved the big problem, since it is difficult for her children to find work, even after they have been exempted from work permits, because the employers prefer Jordanians.
Zainab expressed concern over unequal healthcare treatment based on age, stating that when her son needed to visit a government hospital, they were asked to pay eight and a half dinars. When she questioned the reason, she was told that her son, as the son of a Jordanian woman, had to pay after reaching 18 years of age. However, Zainab argued that her son had not yet turned 17, proving that something was amiss. She then added that she ultimately paid only one and a quarter dinars instead of the initial eight and a half.
Abu Tabikh knows what may await her children if they need health care as foreigners; her husband has spent a few days in intensive care in a government hospital, and the hospital bill amounted to about a thousand dinars, which exceeded her financial capacity. Sometimes, if the patient is unable to pay their bill, they can turn to the Royal Court to solicit an exemption, but this is something that non-Jordanians do not get as easily, even if they are the child or husband of a Jordanian woman. Abu Tabikh tried to go to the Royal Court, and was told to go instead to the prime minister’s office, because the matter concerns a non-Jordanian person, but she has not succeeded in obtaining an exemption yet.
Also, one of Abu Tabikh’s sons still has to register his car in the name of his Jordanian mother, because there are conditions for non-Jordanian ownership that he cannot meet. She explains that the car is a 1996 model, while “if he wants to own a car and register it in his name, it must be new” which means that it is expensive. Then she asks if he is expected to “spend the rest of his life paying car installments?”. In a nutshell, Abu Tabikh considers all this “nonsense, only granting nationality is the solution”.
Eight years after the children of Jordanian women were granted these benefits, Al-Wakil says his attitude towards them has not changed. He was not enthusiastic about it even at the time, but he considers they were accepted “as a way to reach nationality,” and adds that there were people who “out of fear for their children, would accept anything; there is a lady who told me that she would settle for anything, because her children do not have any identification document to be able to walk in the street.” In his opinion, those who were refused a job because they were not Jordanians, and those who had to obtain a work permit and pay 500 dinars for it were relieved when these benefits were issued.
For all these reasons, Al-Wakil says the benefits made an undeniable difference, but without reaching what can be called “equality”, as they revealed many details the government was unaware of. The government “could have done without these facilities as they are not able to control them. The best solution would be for the government to review the nationality issue and grant us nationality”; especially since “the children of Jordanian women are here obviously; meaning that you will not host anyone from abroad to share electricity and water with you; they are here, and consume water, electricity, bread and everything”.
In his comment on the issuance of the decision granting facilities, former Interior Minister Nayef Al-Kadi considered in a media interview that the government has provided an adequate solution, because “These children have fathers, the fathers have nationalities, and we do not want to assume the responsibility of the fathers because they are married to Jordanian women; they should take responsibility for the nationality of their children, and the question is why these fathers do not give their nationalities to their children, whether they are Egyptian, Palestinian or otherwise?”
Specialized reports and testimonies of many children of Jordanian women disagree with Al-Kadi, considering that what has been provided so far is a partial solution, and what is more, it is a solution that cannot be inherited. Al-Wakil refers to a case he knows of a daughter born to an Egyptian father and a Jordanian mother, and a mother from Gaza Strip also born to a Jordanian mother, both of whom have lived in Jordan all their lives. They got married and had children who were treated as foreigners, evidently, and the partial solution did not benefit them in anything; the problem is inherited but the benefits are not!
