The definition of political offense and its impacts on the basic human rights and freedoms in Arab countries (The case of Jordan)

This study examines the concept of political offense and its implications for constitutional rights and freedoms, with particular reference to Jordan and selected Arab legislative approaches. Using a doctrinal legal method, it analyzes constitutional texts, penal legislation, judicial decisions, relevant academic literature, and selected international legal instruments. The article proceeds in three parts: first, it traces the historical development of political offense; second, it examines the definition of political offense in academic writing, selected Arab legislations, Jordanian law, and international legal materials; and third, it assesses the impact of the concept on constitutional rights and freedoms in Jordan, especially political participation, access to public office, penal treatment, and freedom of opinion and expression. The study also examines recent developments in Jordan's Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 and their implications for freedom of expression and political dissent. The study argues that no precise and universally accepted definition of political offense currently exists and that this definitional uncertainty undermines legal certainty, complicates judicial interpretation, and may affect the effective protection of constitutional rights and freedoms. It further argues that peaceful political dissent should not be conflated with violent, terroristic, or ordinary criminal conduct. Accordingly, the study proposes that political offense should be understood narrowly as peaceful and non-violent conduct connected to political dissent, reform, or participation in public affairs, provided that it does not involve violence, sabotage, incitement, or serious violations of the rights of others.