Anas Al-Rawashdeh
Administrative corruption and job favoritism pose two chronic and complex challenges that stand as obstacles to achieving sustainable development and enhancing trust between citizens and government institutions in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Despite the legislative and reform efforts made by the state over the decades, these manifestations of poor administration continue to drain public resources and undermine the principle of equal opportunity, negatively affecting economic efficiency and social justice. Understanding the roots, mechanisms, and impacts of these phenomena is essential for developing effective strategies to combat them and building a modern state of institutions.
Administrative corruption is defined as the misuse of public authority for personal or factional gain, and includes bribery, embezzlement, nepotism, and abuse of influence. Whereas job favoritism is a specific form of corruption focused on favoritism in appointments, promotions, and leadership positions, often based on personal relationships or political or tribal loyalties instead of competence and qualifications. These two concepts are closely linked, as weak oversight and lack of transparency open the door to exploiting positions to distribute undue benefits.
The problem of administrative corruption in Jordan is rooted in several structural and institutional factors. First, governance remains weak at times, especially in entities and institutions lacking effective internal and external oversight mechanisms. When bureaucratic procedures are complicated and unclear, it is easy for an official to exploit this to request financial or in-kind facilitations. Second, nepotism plays a historic and social role, where individuals rely on their social networks to secure services or jobs, weakening the concept of equal citizenship.
Job favoritism is one of the most visible examples of corruption directly affecting citizens. When officials are appointed to sensitive positions without the necessary competence, the quality of services provided is significantly impacted. For example, this can be seen in the slow processing of transactions, poor levels of strategic planning in some public sectors, and increased wastage of public funds due to unwise decisions resulting from loyalty-based appointments. This favoritism also generates immense frustration among educated and productive Jordanian youth who see doors of opportunity closed due to the absence of fairness in government employment.
The effects of administrative corruption and job favoritism go beyond the moral and social aspects to affect the national economy. The persistence of these practices leads to the erosion of trust in the state's integrity, which negatively reflects on the investment climate, both local and foreign. Investors shy away from environments that require payments to obtain approvals or that do not guarantee fair application of laws. Moreover, corruption leads to an inflated public sector with unproductive contractors, increasing financial burdens on the public budget and delaying the implementation of vital development projects.
At the legislative level, Jordan has taken important steps in fighting corruption, notably the establishment of the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Commission and the activation of the Right to Information Law. However, the biggest challenge remains the effective and strict application of these laws and avoiding selectivity in prosecution. A successful anti-corruption campaign requires genuine political will that does not hesitate to hold powerful individuals accountable, regardless of their positions or affiliations.
To achieve sustainable reform, several axes must be focused on. First, enhance internal and external oversight by empowering the Audit Bureau and activating the role of relevant oversight bodies, ensuring their complete independence from the executive authority. Second, full transparency must be applied to all public sector appointment and promotion procedures, relying exclusively on a system of competencies and open competitions, and possibly leveraging modern technology to reduce human friction in administrative decision-making. Also, protection mechanisms for whistleblowers must be activated to ensure the flow of important information without fear of retaliation.
Third, the approach must start from social norms by enhancing a culture of integrity and accountability in educational curricula, and correcting the societal view of public employees as servants to the citizens and not as owners of authority to request benefits. Fighting job favoritism requires dismantling networks of nepotism that rely on narrow loyalties, and replacing them with a single loyalty to the public interest of the Jordanian state and all its citizens.
In conclusion, administrative corruption and job favoritism represent structural obstacles for Jordan in its path towards economic and social development. Genuine and sustainable reform cannot be achieved unless there is a strong will to transform the legal framework into daily practice characterized by rigor and justice. Restoring citizens' trust requires absolute transparency in managing the state's affairs, and relentless application of the principle that everyone is equal before the law, and that appointment and promotion should be rewards for competence, not for connections. This is the true gateway to ensuring a more prosperous and just future for Jordan.
May God protect Jordan from all the corrupt beneficiaries of its goodness who do not belong to it truly belonging.
