Introduction

The incidents documented during June and July 2026 indicate that restrictions on civic space in Jordan remain in place, particularly in the areas of digital expression and peaceful assembly. Cases of detention or the enforcement of sentences related to social media posts or opinions expressed online were recorded, alongside a case concerning press freedom and the prevention of a public march that had been scheduled to take place in central Amman.

Freedom of expression

1. Detention of Sahm Al-Hawamdeh over social media posts

During July 2026, retired Jordanian intelligence officer Sahm Al-Hawamdeh was detained over social media posts and comments addressing public affairs, including appointments and alleged conflicts of interest within public institutions. According to reports published in local media, Al-Hawamdeh remained in detention for several weeks pending investigation before being released during the first week of August 2026. It was also reported that he suffers from health problems, including high blood pressure, and that he stopped taking his medication in protest against his detention. This case is particularly significant because it relates to digital expression on public affairs and to citizens’ right to hold officials accountable and comment on public policies. Although his release constitutes a positive development, his detention for several weeks remains an important indication of the continued use of detention in cases related to expression on social media platforms.

2. Imprisonment of sports journalist Rima Al-Abadi

On 9 July 2026, the case of sports journalist Aisha Salman Al-Aliwat, professionally known as Rima Al-Abadi, was recorded. She was imprisoned to enforce a judicial sentence issued against her under the Cybercrime Law, in connection with a case involving content published on digital platforms. This case is particularly significant because it lies at the intersection of freedom of the press and freedom of digital expression, reflecting the continued use of custodial penalties in cases involving content published online. It also raises questions regarding the proportionality of the sentence to the alleged conduct and the impact of such judgments on the freedom of journalists and media professionals to use digital platforms, express their views, or publish content related to public affairs. 

3. Imprisonment of Firas Al-Tawahiyeh Al-Abadi to enforce a prison sentence

During the beginning of  July 2026, Jordanian security services arrested activist Firas Al-Tawahiyeh Al-Abadi to enforce a one-year prison sentence against him, in connection with a case concerning the exercise of freedom of opinion and expression and his opposition to the Jordanian regime. The case raises additional concerns due to his health condition, as he reportedly suffers from health problems and is said to have experienced several strokes in the past period. The case therefore concerns not only freedom of expression, but also the extent to which the health condition of detainees or convicted persons is taken into consideration when sentences are enforced. This case raises serious questions regarding the compatibility of the measures taken with Jordan’s international human rights obligations, particularly with regard to protecting freedom of opinion and expression and ensuring that deprivation of liberty is not used as a means of punishing individuals for their peaceful opinions or positions.

4. Detention of Laith Osama Al-Breizat over expression of opinion

During June 2026, the detention of activist Laith Osama Al-Breizat was recorded in connection with posts or positions in which he expressed his opinion regarding an event held in the city of Petra that generated public controversy in Jordan. This case indicates that restrictions on expression are not limited to direct political issues, but may also extend to public discussions of a social or cultural nature, particularly when they take place through social media and generate significant engagement in the public sphere.

Freedom of peaceful assembly

Prevention of a public march in front of Al-Husseini Mosque in Amman

A planned Friday march in downtown Amman on 19 June 2026, intended to take place after prayers in solidarity with Palestine, was cancelled by authorities shortly before it was due to proceed, despite organizers stating they had complied with legal notification requirements. Organizers later attempted to postpone the march to 26 June, but reporting indicates that authorities maintained tight control over public demonstrations, and the mobilisation did not develop into a large-scale or sustained protest event. 

On 25 June 2026, the Governor of Amman decided to prevent a public march that had been scheduled to take place in front of Al-Husseini Mosque in central Amman on Friday, 26 June 2026. The call for the march came from popular and civil society groups, in the context of expressing political and solidarity-related positions. According to reports published in local media, the decision to prevent the march was based on considerations relating to security and public order. This case is one of the most significant incidents related to freedom of peaceful assembly during the reporting period. The prior administrative prohibition of a public event limits the ability of civil society and popular groups to express themselves collectively in the public sphere, even in the absence of arrests or the use of force. The case raises questions regarding the consistency of such prohibitions with the principles of necessity and proportionality, as well as the availability of effective means of challenging administrative decisions that restrict peaceful assembly.

General Analysis of Trends

The incidents documented during June and July 2026 reveal the continuation of a number of restrictions affecting civic space in Jordan, particularly in the areas of digital expression, freedom of the press, and freedom of peaceful assembly. The nature of these incidents indicates that the digital sphere has become a key arena for public debate, while at the same time becoming increasingly subject to scrutiny and legal action, particularly when expression concerns public affairs, criticism of policies, or criticism of officials.

These trends indicate that the use of detention or legal proceedings in cases involving online posts or digital opinions may have a broader deterrent effect beyond the individual cases themselves, as it may encourage others to refrain from expressing their views or participating in public debate for fear of being subjected to legal action. There are also continuing concerns regarding the use of legislation related to cybercrime in cases involving journalists, media professionals, and participants in the digital public sphere.

At the same time, restrictions imposed on public gatherings demonstrate the continued broad role of administrative authorities in regulating the public sphere, including preventing public events before they take place. This reflects an ongoing challenge to the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly, particularly when prohibition decisions are not accompanied by clear and specific justifications or are not subjected to an assessment of necessity and proportionality.

On this basis, the significance of the documented incidents lies not only in their number, but also in their nature and cumulative impact on civic space. They point to an environment that continues to impose restrictions on the ability of citizens, journalists, activists, and civil society groups to express themselves, hold authorities accountable, organize, and participate peacefully in public debate. They also underscore the need for continued monitoring in the coming periods, with a focus on recurring patterns of violations rather than individual cases alone.