The revision of Jordan's constitution and electoral laws in 2011 -- 2012 was opposed by both political groups the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the National Front for Reform (NFR), who demanded a reduction of the king's power and an increase in democratic policies. This heuristic qualitative cross-sectional study explored the emergence of the MB and the NFR in shaping the constitutional amendments and electoral law in Jordan. The research questions highlighted the current perspectives of the leaders of the MB and the NFR and their perceived impact of the political reform in Jordan now and in the future. The theoretical construct was based Rousseau's conceptualization of the social contract. In order to fill the gap in the empirical literature, 12 semistructured interviews were conducted using Skype and telephone, employing 6 MB and 6 NFR leaders (N = 12). Data collected through interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, translated, member checked, manually emergently and inductively coded, themed, and analyzed to address the research questions. The key finding indicates that the leaders of the MB and the NFR believe that the regime is not serious in the reform effort. The King's power has not been reduced and democratic policies have not increased. The MB and the NFR agree about their domestic reform efforts but they are divided over regional issues, which weakened their position and they tolerated regime's stubbornness. The MB and the NFR leaders agree about peacefully increasing political pressure to avoid violence. Positive social change implications include informing leaders in Jordan of the importance of handling political conflicts peacefully, and citizen's rights to peaceful participation in the democratic process in order to representationally develop the constitution and the electoral laws.
展开▼
