The other day Al Ghad ran a story (for English read this part) about the Jordanian Ombudsman institution and my country’s involvement in its establishment. Basically, the journalist had found an anonymous source claiming that Denmark was supposed to fund the institution for the next three years but because of disagreement about the structure of the ombudsman we had withdrawn from the commitment and Jordan had lost “millions”.
To my knowledge the paper had not tried to get a comment from the Embassy or me – which I understand since that would have deprived them this front-page. Like everyone else I am frustrated by the widespread self censorship but a bit more self-criticism and professionalism wouldn’t be bad at all.
Anyway, another Jordanian daily called me the same morning and asked me to comment on the story, which I did as follows (questions omitted).
“The article is apparently based on some misunderstandings that could have been clarified if the newspaper had asked the Danish embassy for comments before printing the story. Denmark has been supporting the establishment of the Jordanian ombudsman institution since 2004 and it has always been the intention to end financial support with the formal establishment of the institution. Originally it was foreseen to end the financial support in 2007 but the grants were extended until end 2008 when the institution was established. The ombudsman institution is one among many other projects that we support in Jordan through the Danish-Jordanian Partnership Program.”
“Denmark has been supporting the technical unit for the establishment of the ombudsman and a number of seminars and visits to other ombudsman institutions in preparation of the Jordanian law and technical regulations establishing the institution. There has been neither pledge nor intention on the Danish side to fund an up and running working institution. Such an important national institution needs to draw its main funding from the national budget voted by parliament and not from foreign countries. An ombudsman dependent on funds outside the national budget could raise questions as regards the independence of the institution which would be damaging to its credibility. To my knowledge the Jordanian ombudsman institution is today funded from the national budget for the financial year 2009 – as it should be.”
“No […Denmark is not obliged to financially support the ombudsman…], not after this grant expired end last year. What we hope is that the Jordanian ombudsman – when he once again has been appointed – seeks partners among other European ombudsman institutions including the Danish ombudsman for technical cooperation and exchange of best practices. We will try to help facilitate such exchanges between different ombudsman institutions and their Jordanian counterpart.”
“The ombudsman setup that was chosen in Jordan is not in all aspects similar to the Danish counterpart. One reason for this is the difference in our constitutions. Our ombudsman is attached to the parliament only, where in Jordan he is primarily attached to the executive – the government. It is not an unknown model in some countries but it might raise questions as to his independence of the executive branch. None the less it is important that the new ombudsman quickly seeks to establish relations to the International Ombudsman Institution in Vienna in order to be internationally acknowledged as an ombudsman institution. But what is also very important is to understand that any ombudsman institution has to take into account the local and national context in which he functions. That is why Denmark never has sought to impose a specific model on Jordan.”
“Since 2004 we have been supporting the Jordanian ombudsman project with a total amount of around 1 million USD.”
Ad Dustour and Al Rai have run stories about the ombudsman today – both touching on this issue.
Update 7.5.09: Minister of State for Legal Affairs (and former ombudsman) Salem Khazaleh corrects Al Ghad on Petra News Agency. And a long story on Ammonnews.net with contradicting statements. I tried to post a comment but I don’t think it was accepted.
May 6, 2009 at 00:07
Why did you assume that the ombudsperson is a “He”? I think the perfect man for this job is a woman. Your point about the executive branch is excellent and extremely relevant. The key success factor of such an institution is its independence to investigate grievances in an objective and transparent manner. The nature of grievances this institution is expected to handle would probably shed the most light on what its final structure / model should be. Finally I am truly impressed to see an ambassador reaching out through a blog.
May 6, 2009 at 07:41
Point taken – let’s see, according to the law a new ombudsman
should be appointed within the next few weeks – and it might very well be a well qualified woman.
Thank you for your comment.
November 21, 2009 at 23:45
[...] this into account when researching and writing their articles. I am sorry to say that – based on a number of personal experiences in Jordan – this is not always the case in Jordan. Sources are accepted at [...]