The Day After the Elections

By Mohammad Aburumman

تم نشره في Sun 4 September / Sep 2016. 11:00 PM - آخر تعديل في Mon 5 September / Sep 2016. 07:37 PM
  • Mohammad Aburumman

Some official raise valid concern on the possible violent reactions by candidates and their masses should they lose the election race.

These worries sprout from two main issues. The first arises from the fact that the new elections law denies, relatively, “rights” acquired and strongly clutched to by MPs and constituencies over the recent years, emplaced and fortified by the Single-Vote system and the virtual circuits, and basis on a vaster representation per governorate, which will cost some tribes and areas the seats they’ve managed to retain constantly in previous elections, dawning with unexpected results, particularly in the areas more susceptible to social sensitivities.

The second issues is related to the concepts of broadcasting manipulation. Which is basically manipulating the electorate, and is only natural to those who realise the Jordanian social structure, as they aggregate votes to certain lists, only to finally vote for some on that list and not to others on it, which will result in disparities among contingencies over candidates, and maybe even more than just “disparity”.

Surely we do not wish any of this to happen, are at least for things to remain within the contexts of law, without violence. But, if we are to take in the worst case scenario and picture the rise of violent protests by losing candidates and their electorates, with things rolling in the direction of violence, what would the response of the state possibly be?

Such scenarios require much planning ahead of time, for the state to be able to contain it, entailing precise estimations and evaluations of the state, media, and political elites’ roles prior to the elections, as a precaution, not after the deed is done, to at least minimise its damages as much as possible.

The role of security devices occupy, naturally, a fundamental place in the enforcement of law and the sustenance of public order, to prevent political phishing for trouble and violence, should any lose their shot at parliament. But at the same time, there are necessarily required tools and dynamics that need to be placed in parallel with the security dynamic, like the roles of the political elite, the ministry of interior and the political-media message of the state, to construct a public atmosphere that would compress any violent reflexes to the elections.

Also, conducting transparent, credible elections is another paramount task for the State to see through on multiple levels in this particular historic moment, locally and regionally; the day after the elections, should the government successfully administrate possible chaos and generalise successfully a state of order and law, communicating the State’s messages, beforehand, that any disturbance of peace will be dealt with swiftly and strictly. This now, comprises a no lesser challenge that the prior trial.

No ill will is hoped fore here. I personally wish to bet our people’s awareness will allow them to accept the outcomes of the elections, with experience. But it is important, just as well, that the State pre-valuates the settings, and conduct their pre-election tasks to the fullest, which includes the formulation of the official media-political message for the public, facilitating debates and meets with candidates to reassure on the bundle of commitments and conditions required in the wake of the publication of the results, and obligating them to these terms administratively and socially!

Comment