Jordan's_2007_Parliamentary_Elections_

Tel: (962) 6 566-6122, Fax: (962) 6 566-6123, P.O. Box: 3375, Amman, 11942, Email: mjcsr@go.com.jo Website: www.jcsr-jordan.org Jordan’s 2007 Parliamentary Elections: Tracking & Exit Polls Conducted in Six Electoral Districts: Amman 3rd, Amman 4th, Zarqa 1st, Irbid 2nd, Karak 1st and Tafileh 1st January 20, 2008 The parliamentary election tracking polls were conducted in two waves, on October 25-28 and November 8-11, 2007. 3010 interviews were conducted in the first wave & 2961 interviews in the second wave. The parliamentary elections exit poll was conducted on Election Day, November 20, 2007. 3729 interviews were conducted. Margin of error is ±2% at 95% confidence level The field work for these polls was conducted by Middle East Marketing and Research Consultants. For the exit poll, MEMRC mobilized 195 interviewers, supervisors and coordinators; 88 technicians for data collection, entry and processing; four system analysts and six executive staff. The exit poll covered 104 balloting centers out of a total of 209 located in the six districts, or 467 ballot boxes out of a total of 816. For further information or inquiries, irie contact Dr. Musa Shteiwi at the above address. iw This poll was supported by the International Republican Institute (IRI) 1 JORDAN’S 2007 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS: Tracking & Exit Polls Conducted in Six Electoral Districts Amman 3rd, Amman 4th, Zarqa 1st, Irbid 2nd, Karak 1st and Tafileh 1st BACKGROUND Elections for the Lower House of the Jordanian Parliament were held on November 20, 2007. These were the fifth national elections in Jordan since the return of electoral politics to the Kingdom in 1989. The parliamentary elections were conducted according to the 2003 Temporary Election Law which stipulates a “one-person one-vote” system, i.e. a single non-transferable vote system in multiple-member districts which allows voters to choose one candidate on the ballot. The Law also establishes a six-seat quota for women, a nine-seat quota for Christians and three seats set aside for Circassians/Chechens. A total of 885 candidates, including an unprecedented 199 women, ran for the Lower House’s 110 seats. The opposition Islamic Action Front (IAF), Jordan’s largest political party, ran 22 candidates. The voting process nationwide appears to have gone smoothly. Unlike during the municipal elections on July 31 of this year, there were no reports of significant violence on Election Day. The government announced soon after the elections that voter turnout was 55%, slightly down from the 58% turnout in the 2003 parliamentary elections. Initial results show lower than usual turnout in the large cities of Zarqa and Amman, and much higher turnout in districts considered to be tribal. The most noteworthy development in the elections was the poorer than expected showing of the IAF candidates. Only six Islamist candidates won seats (down from 17 seats in the previous parliament.) No IAF candidates won in their traditional strongholds of Zarqa and Irbid, and some big Islamist names lost their seats in the capital. Half of the winning IAF candidates won in cities known for their strong tribal bases namely Karak, Ajloun and Jerash. The IAF blamed the government for its defeat, accusing it of facilitating vote-buying by wealthy pro-government candidates and allowing illegal transfers of voters from one constituency to another to ensure the victory of particular independent/tribal candidates. In its report on the parliamentary elections, Jordan’s quasi-governmental National Center for Human Rights reported that it had received numerous complaints from voters concerning large-scale transfer of votes and vote buying. And indeed, mostly tribal pro-government candidates and independent urban businessmen were elected to parliament. Other than the IAF, no political party representative won a seat. 2 Seven women were elected to parliament, six for the quota seats and one in a direct election outside the quota. In 2003, no women won in head-to-head races with male candidates. Three of the seven women were MPs in the 2003 parliament. The Jordan Center for Social Research and its partners conducted the first ever parliamentary election exit poll in Jordan on Election Day. The exit poll followed two parliamentary tracking polls which were conducted on October 25-28 and November 8-11. This is the tenth in a series of public opinion surveys conducted by JCSR and its partners examining Jordanians’ attitudes towards political reform, electoral politics and local governance in the Kingdom. This series includes the first exit poll ever conducted in Jordan during the July 2007 municipal elections. The tracking and exit polls were conducted in six electoral districts located throughout the country varying in size and composition of population: Amman 3rd, Amman 4th, Zarqa 1st, Irbid 2nd, Karak 1st and Tafileh 1st. Each tracking poll consisted of 500 face-to-face interviews in each district; half of the interviewees were men and half were women. The exit poll was conducted during polling hours on Election Day in a total of 104 polling stations in the six electoral districts. Polls were open from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm. Polling hours were extended in Amman districts. The computation of results was carried out in four runs at 10:00 am, 1:00 pm, 4:00 pm and the close of the polling stations. Nearly 4,000 voters were interviewed on Election Day. With these tracking and exit polls, JCSR and its partners hope to shed light on voting patterns, voter behavior and electoral culture in Jordan’s 2007 parliamentary elections for the benefit of decision makers, elected officials and the general public. In particular, these polls seek to examine voters’ decisions with regard to choosing political party versus independent candidates and the reasons behind those decisions. 3 SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS: The government announced shortly after Election Day that there had been a 55% turnout rate. As of the writing of this report, however, there was no final official turnout data available for Jordan’s 45 electoral districts. Therefore we are not able to compare the level of likelihood to participate found in our tracking surveys with official data. According to semi-final official results, voter turnout continued to be low in large metropolitan districts like Amman and Zarqa in contrast to a much higher turnout in the smaller cities and rural areas around the Kingdom. According to both the tracking surveys and the exit poll, Jordanians continue to vote for “independent’ candidates,” with tribal and family affiliations still being the most important considerations driving voters’ decisions. This data was confirmed by the poor showing of political party candidates on Election Day. According to semi-final official results, the tracking and exit polls accurately predicted 18 of the 21 parliamentary races in the six electoral districts. There were at least two “surprise winners” (in Amman 3rd and Zarqa 1st) who did not do well in either the tracking polls or the exit poll but somehow managed to win a parliamentary seat thereby displacing a candidate who was predicted to be a “sure winner.” The two tracking polls accurately predicted the poor showing of the IAF on Election Day. The tracking polls showed that the IAF would receive an average of 7.4% of the vote in the six districts. This was consistent with a national poll conducted by JCSR and its partners in August 2007 which showed that 7.6% of all likely voters nationwide would vote for the IAF. According to unofficial final election results, the IAF received a little less than 7.0% of the total vote on Election Day (compared to 16.4% of the national vote the party received in 2003.) The poor showing of the IAF in these elections is also consistent with the findings of an exit poll conducted during the municipal elections on July 31 which showed the IAF losing every mayor’s race in the six districts polled before the party’s withdrawal from the elections halfway through the voting. With the exception of one IAF candidate, the exit poll correctly predicted the showing of the IAF candidates in all six survey districts. Only one IAF candidate won in the districts covered. Parties of leftist and Pan-Arabist tendencies fared worse than the Islamists. According to our tracking and exit poll results, non-IAF political party candidates were not predicted to do well on Election Day. In fact, none made it to Parliament. There were allegations of fraud by the IAF and other losing candidates who pointed to illegal vote purchasing by candidates and widespread vote transfers. The tribal vote was “split” in these elections to a greater degree than in previous contests as more and more candidates put their names forward from the same tribe. This could indicate a breakdown in the system of tribal consensus, whereby a tribe comes to agreement internally on a single candidate. The upward mobility of newly rich and highly educated younger tribe members could be one explanation. Another might be the absence of “middle tribal leadership” in position to replace a passing older generation. 4 As indicated in our exit poll, youth turnout was disappointingly low taking into consideration that the government and civil society made every effort to mobilize and energize the new generation to make their voices heard at the ballot box. A major positive aspect of the elections was the increased number of women running for parliament, four times the number of candidates in the 2003 elections. One woman candidate, competing in a strongly tribal environment, won her seat outside the women’s quota system. Another woman candidate came within 15 votes of winning outright. Both are expected to become role models for women’s engagement in public life for future generations of female candidates. However, because the women’s quota seats were determined by the highest percentage of total votes in a district (as opposed to the largest absolute number of votes obtained), it was almost impossible for women in larger, more urban districts to win either by the current quota system or on a competitive basis. Most of the women winners came from smaller, rural districts. Regarding women’s participation as voters, the story is mixed. Among the six survey districts, our exit poll indicates that the overall participation of women was 48.0%, identical to their turnout in the municipal elections. Voting for women did not exceed 8.0%, or 3.0% lower than in the municipal elections according to our exit poll conducted at the time. Women voting for women did not exceed 11.0% or identical to the municipal elections VS 89.0% who voted for men. 5 Parliamentary Elections Tracking & Exit Polls: 2007 Jordan Parliamentary Elections Conducted in Six Electoral Districts: Amman 3rd, Amman 4th, Zarqa 1st, Irbid 2nd, Karak 1st and Tafileh 1st In these electoral districts candidates competed for the following number of allocated seats: Amman 3rd District: Amman 4th District: Zarqa 1st District: Irbid 2nd District: Karak 1st District: Tafileh 1st District: 4 Muslim Seats & 1 Christian 3 Muslim Seats 2 Muslim Seats, 1 Christian & 1 Chechen 2 Muslim Seats & 1 Christian 2 Muslim Seats & 1 Christian 3 Muslim Seats MAIN FINDINGS Expected & Actual Turnout Rates In the first and second waves of the tracking polls [conducted Oct 25-28 and Nov 811, respectively], the expected average likely turnout according to those interviewees who said they would definitely participate in the November 20 parliamentary elections ranged between 57.8% and 87.2% with the lowest being in the Amman and Zarqa survey districts and the highest in the Irbid, Karak and Tafileh survey districts. According to unofficial actual turnout in the survey districts, Amman 3rd and Zarqa 1st scored below the national average at 49.0% [but higher than 42.0% in 2003] and 37.0% [and lower than 45.0% in 2003], respectively. There is almost a 42-30 percentage points’ difference between the highest turnout in Tafileh 1st and the lowest in Amman 3rd and Zarqa, respectively. Will Definitely Participate VS Turnouts 07 and 03 100 82 80 79 78 68 80 66 71 68 51 71 68 45 37 67 76 66 92 83 82 79 60 40 20 0 59 57 49 42 Amman 3rd Amman 4th Zarqa 1st Irbid 2nd Karak 1st Tafileh 1st Wave 1 Wave 2 Turnout [unoffical] 2003 6 Voter Behavior and Political Parties Asked whether they would vote for an independent or a political party candidate, the overwhelming majority of respondents opted to vote for an independent candidate. The percentage of those who were likely to vote for a political party candidate ranged between a high 9.8% in Karak 1st and a low 2.4% in Irbid 2nd. 100 80 60 40 20 0 14 7 12 8 7 79 80 82 91 84 92 Totals: Waves 1 & 2 11 2 10 6 Karak 1st 6 5 3 Tafileh 1st Amman 3rd Amman 4th Zarqa 1st Irbid 2nd Independent Undecided/Refused to Answer Political Party Of those who said they would vote for a political party, 60.0% in Amman 4th and a high of 89.0% in Zarqa, traditionally an IAF stronghold, said they were likely to vote for Jordan’s strongest political party, the IAF. Results in Amman 4th showed a lower likelihood to vote for an IAF candidate and a higher percentage of undecided voters. This tracking poll finding may have indicated why an IAF candidate trailed behind in Amman 4th on Election Day. The IAF did not field a candidate in Irbid 2nd. Totals: Waves 1 & 2 100 89 80 60 40 20 0 15 14 Amman 3rd 35 9 8 6 Amman 4th IAF Zarqa 1st Undecided Karak 1st Other Parties 2 Tafileh 1st 11 72 61 86 87 5 3 7 The two tracking polls predicted that IAF candidates would get an average of 7.4% of the total number of votes in each of the survey districts. The graph below compares the tracking poll results with the actual unofficial results. Predictions for IAF Candidates in Waves 1 & 2 and Actual [Unofficial] 20 (Two Zarqa Candidates Combined) 12.8 11.5 7.1 5.1 0 Amman 3rd Amman 4th Zarqa 1st* Karak 1st Tafileh 1st Wave 2 [8-11 Nov] 7.6 7.5 5.7 5.5 9.8 11.8 6.1 14.1 13.8 7.3 5.1 *Individual tracking results for the two IAF candidates in Zarqa were: Candidate 1: 4.9% and 7.3% Candidate 2: 4.9% and 4.2% Wave 1 [25-28 Oct] Actual [Unofficial] This is consistent with the results from a JCSR national poll conducted in August 2007: “Of those 8.0% who say they are likely to vote for a political party candidate, 67.1% say they are likely to vote for the Islamic Action Front, which is 7.6% of those who would participate in the elections…and 5.4% of the total sample”. This is also consistent with other national polls on the likelihood to vote for the IAF [7.6%]. According to the two election tracking surveys the IAF candidates would have ranked second in Amman 3rd district and fifth in Amman 4th, third and fifth in Zarqa 1st, first in Karak 1st and sixth in Tafileh 1st. [There was no IAF candidate in Irbid 2nd]. Two out of six IAF candidates were predicted to win according to the two election tracking surveys, one in Amman 3rd and one in Karak 1st. The exit poll conducted on Election Day also showed that an IAF candidate was in a position to win in Amman 3rd and Karak 1st with a fair chance for one of the IAF candidates to win in Zarqa 1st. Actual election results indicate that the IAF candidates came in fifth and fourth place in Amman 3rd and 4th districts respectively, in fifth and sixth place in Zarqa 1st district, in 1st place in Karak 1st district and in seventh place in Tafileh 1st district. Only one IAF candidate won a seat in these six districts. There were two surprises when comparing the tracking and exit polls with the actual results as announced. Two candidates were leading in the tracking and exit polls but did not win a seat. One of these was in Amman 3rd [the IAF candidate] and one was in Zarqa 1st [an independent]. [See Appendix I] The parliamentary elections exit poll shows that a sizeable number of voters had decided to vote for their candidate within the last 30 days before the election. This 8 represents almost 30.0% of voters in Amman 3rd and Zarqa 1st [VS 70.0% locked over a month ago], 24.0% in Amman 4th [VS 76.0% locked over a month ago], 22% in Karak 1st [VS 78.0% locked over a month ago], 20% in Irbid 2nd [VS 80.0% locked over a month ago] and 12% in Tafileh 1st [VS 88.0% locked over a month ago]. Decided to vote for candidate 10 10 10 9 8 7 10 9 11 5 5 11 5 7 10 4 3 6 70 76 70 80 78 88 Amman 3rd Amman 4th Zarqa 1st Irbid 2nd Karak 1st Tafileh 1st Within last 4 weeks Today Over 4 weeks ago Within last 7 days Almost 10.0% decided on their choice of candidate on the same day of the elections in Amman 3rd and 4th and Zarqa 1st. Cross tabs of TODAY voting decisions show that 26.0% of Amman’s 3rd District’s total votes went to the IAF candidate in the afternoon hours. 14.0% of “today voters” went to the IAF candidate in Amman 4th towards 4:00 pm and later. In Zarqa 1st District it was around 18.8% share of the day’s vote that went also to the IAF candidate towards 4:00 and later. Were the IAF candidates prepared for the competition' Or were they taken by surprise in most of the districts and started their campaigns later than others' Although some of the IAF candidates did not run again this year, the number of votes the party received in 2003 was much larger than in 2007. The IAF winner won by 7,891 votes in Amman 3rd in 2003; this year the IAF candidate achieved 6,049 votes, or a drop of 1,842 votes. In Zarqa 1st, the male and female IAF candidates won by 8,095 and 7,133 votes respectively in 2003. This year, the male and female candidates [the female candidate running a second time] together hardly achieved half their 2003 vote total: 3,756 votes for the female candidate and just 2,715 for the male candidate, a combined drop of 8,757 votes. One IAF candidate who ran in Balqa 4th [the city of Ain Al-Basha, not in our sample] in 2003 and achieved 10,224 votes this year received 4,607 votes or a negative balance of 5,567 votes. In Karak 1st district, the IAF candidate who came in fourth in 2003 with 4,196 votes this year came in first place with only 3,544 votes. In Tafileh 1st, the IAF candidate took 1,295 votes trailing the first place winner distantly by 4,758 votes. 9 Other examples indicate a similar trend. The IAF candidate in Amman 1st [not in our sample] was elected in 2003 with 15,833 votes compared to just 4,779 votes in this year’s elections. The second IAF candidate in this same district won in 2003 with 9,523 votes compared with 4,744 votes in these elections. The first candidate came in fourth place on November 20 and the latter lost the race. Conducted in August 2007, our National Poll #5 included trends and predictions with regards to strength of various political tendencies and likelihood to vote for a political party candidate, including the IAF. Islamist tendencies would typically imply both IAF and independent Islamists. [See graph below]. Voter Political Tendencies 60 44 40 23 20 6 0 DEC 05 MAY 06 MAR 07 AUG 07 Arab Nationalist Islamist Jordanian Nationalist 35 20 5 37 41 100 80 60 17 6 14 7 40 20 0 Likelihood to Vote 67 72 77 18 9 MAY 06 17 7 MAR 07 Political Party Candidate [IAF] Independent 8 5 AUG 07 A comparison of the 2003 and 2007 election results in four of the survey districts indicates a drop of 45.6% in the actual number of votes for IAF candidates. [Two districts are excluded: Irbid 2nd which had no IAF candidates running this year, and Tafileh 1st where data for 2003 is not available.] Of special interest is the considerable drop in support for IAF candidates in both Zarqa 1st and Amman 4th, two supposed IAF strongholds. In Zarqa, both IAF candidates lost, and in Amman 4th the IAF candidate came in fourth place. 2003 Parliamentary Elections IAF Candidate Results District IAF Total Individual District Number of No. of Votes Votes Karak 1st 4,196 26,165 Zarqa 1st 8,095 66,780 7,133 Amman 11,484 66,365 4th Amman 7,891 67,085 3rd TOTAL 38,799 226,395 2007 Parliamentary Elections IAF Candidate Results IAF Total % of Individual District District Number of No. of Total Votes Votes Votes 3544 25,142 14.1 3756 50,408 12.8 2715 6676 88,622 7.5 6049 22,740 79,386 243,558 7.6 9.3 Variance % % of District Total Votes 16.0 22.8 17.3 11.8 17.1 -1.9 -10.0 -9.8 -4.2 -7.8 On a national level, the total loss for the IAF was much greater. In the 2003 elections, the IAF fielded 29 candidates and won 17, this year it fielded 22 and won 10 6 or a total loss by the IAF of 58.0% of their voting base. In the 2003 elections, the IAF voter base totaled approximately 166,000 of the total voter turnout of 1,014,000 or 16.4% of total votes cast. In the 2007 elections, the IAF voter base shrank to around 96,000 out of a total national voter turnout of 1,456,000 or 6.6% of total votes cast. The election results came as a surprise to observers and analysts as it dealt a hard blow to the Muslim Brotherhood and their political arm, the IAF. The Economist Intelligence Unit called it “Islamists’ Electoral Disaster”. Has internal strife affected the IAF base and their once impressive turnout machine' What role did the events in Gaza play' And what is the impact of ongoing conflicts in Gaza and the West Bank' And how do Jordanians perceive the position of the IAF vis-à-vis these events' Did the IAF fail to re-invent itself or its longstanding platform in the way the Turkish and Moroccan Islamist parties have to some degree succeeded to do' Other political parties, like the People’s Democratic Party “Hashed”, the Jordanian Arab Baathist Socialist Party, the National Labor Party “Haqq”, the Islamic Centrist Party “Al Wasat” and the National Constitutional Party were supported in the tracking polls by a mere 11.0% of those who said they were likely to vote for a political party candidate or an average of 0.7% of the total sample in the six survey districts. A coalition of four pan-Arab and leftist parties ran seven candidates under the name “National Democratic Stream.” None of the coalition’s candidates won. This very poor showing indicates that, with the exception of the Islamic Action Front, Jordan does not have a strong political party sector and that it will require great effort on the part of the government, civil society and the private sector to promote the concept of political parties as a vital component of the Kingdom’s political life. While Jordan’s leadership has been calling for the merger of the 37 existing parties into a few strong ideological parties, no major breakthrough has taken place on this front so far. Minorities With regards to Christian quota seats, there were five male contenders in Amman 3rd, four in Zarqa [including one female], four in Irbid 2nd [including one female] and three in Karak 1st. All of these candidates were competing for one assigned seat in their respective electoral districts. The election results showed that the Christian candidate in Amman 3rd came in fifth among all district votes with 6,945 votes [compared to 11604 votes for the first place Muslim winner and 4,492 votes for the Christian winner in 2003]. In Irbid 2nd, the Christian candidate came in second among all district votes with 2,851 votes [compared to 3,351 votes for the first place Muslim winner.] In Karak 1st, the Christian candidate came in third among all district votes with 2,157 votes [compared to 3,544 votes for the first place Muslim winner]. 11 As for the one Chechen/Circassian quota seat in Zarqa 1st, the Chechen candidate came in second among all district votes with 5,617 votes with the Circassian runnerup receiving 5,085 votes or in third rank among all district votes and almost neckand-neck with the second-place Muslim winner. The Circassian winner also did well in Amman 6th [not a survey district] where he came in fourth among all district votes with 5,558 votes. The Circassian quota seat winner in Amman 5th won by 3,732 votes and placed fifth among all district votes. Women Candidates, Women Turnout & Voting For Women The national turnout according to semi-final official statistics was around 55.0%. Among the six survey districts, our exit poll indicates that the overall participation of women was 48.0%, identical to the municipal elections turnout. Women accounted for 8.0% of the candidates in these six survey districts. Voting for women did not exceed 8.0%, or 3.0% lower than in the municipal elections according to our exit poll at the time. Women voting for women did not exceed 11.0% or identical to the municipal elections VS 89.0% who voted for men. Only 5.0% of men voted for women. On a national level, 199 women registered as candidates, almost four times the number of women candidates [54] in the 2003 elections. From one to nine candidates ran in each of Jordan’s 45 electoral districts. Irbid Governorate registered the highest number, 47, followed by Amman and Karak with 28 each. The least were in Aqaba, 4, and Jarash, 3. [Source: Al Syjjyl Weekly]. The high number of women candidates was probably the brightest side of these elections as Jordanian women affirmed their right to run for public office in the face of social and legal hurdles. Ms. Falak Jamaani of Madaba’s 2nd district won her seat on a competitive basis [outside the quota system] in a strongly tribal environment with a total vote of 3,301, almost the same as male candidates received in Madaba 1st district. With her win, Jamaani became a role model for Jordanian women who seek public office in a patriarchal social system. [Source: Al Syjjyl Weekly]. However, because the women’s quota is determined by the highest percentage of the total votes in a district (as opposed to the largest absolute number of votes received), it is almost impossible for women in large districts, like Amman 1st and 3rd and Balqa 1st, to win either by the current quota system or on a competitive basis. Examples of this are Hayat Musseimi of the IAF with 3756 votes in Zarqa 1st and Samar Hajj Hassan with 2068 votes in Amman 3rd. [See table below.] [Source: Al Syjjyl Weekly]. 2007 Parliamentary Elections Female Candidates: Winner and Runner Ups with Over 1,000 Votes 12 Candidate Hayat Al Musseimi [IAF] Falak Al Jamaani Nariman Al Roussan Samar Hajj Hassan Reem Qassem Amneh Al Gharagheer Sabah Al B’toush Insaf Al Khawaldeh Haya Ibrahim Hake Tharwat Al Amro Fayqa Doukrani Nuha Miqdadi Adab Saud Hamdiyeh Quaider Source: Al Syjjyl Weekly District Zarqa 1st Madaba 2nd Irbid 5th Amman 3rd Zarqa 3rd Balqa 3rd Karak 3rd Tafileh Amman 6th Karak 2nd Irbid 1st Zarqa 1st Tafileh 1st Karak 6th # of Votes 3756 3301 2831 2068 1538 1457 1450 1370 1348 1174 1145 1140 1063 700 Result Lost Outright Winner Quota/ Winner 5 Lost Quota/ Winner 3 Quota/ Winner 6 Lost Quota/Winner 1 Lost Quota/Winner 4 Lost Lost Lost Quota/Winner 2 Electoral Culture According to our tracking and exit polls, the most important considerations for voters in choosing their candidate were family and tribal affiliations followed by being a good service provider. The combined factors of “religiosity and party affiliations” (considered a typical IAF vote) did not vary considerably between these districts. Voters in Amman 3rd district laid more emphasis on the importance of the candidates’ electoral campaign than on tribal affiliations. Cross tabulations of those intending to vote for a political party vs. an independent candidate and the main consideration for choosing one’s candidate reveal that political party affiliation and religiosity are the main consideration for those voting for an IAF candidate, while tribal, family and neighborhood affiliations and providing good services are the predominant considerations for those voting for an independent/tribal candidate. However, the latter considerations are not exclusive to voters for independent candidates: IAF/political party voters take such considerations into account as well. Recommendations by a friend, thought to be a typical IAF vote canvassing procedure, did not appear to be a relevant consideration for the IAF/political party voter. This result may be an indicator of a loosening of the party’s grip over its base and/or IAF members’ disenchantment with the party. 13 50 45 40 37 35 Parliamentary Elections Tracking Surveys Total Waves 1 & 2 30 28 22 22 1 1 1 8 7 7 1 4 1 3 1 2 22 1 6 1 9 0 1 5 1 1 9 1 0 8 8 6 5 5 6 4 5 6 7 9 6 6 5 20 1 6 1 4 10 0 Family, Tribal, To wn A ffiliatio ns Go o d Service P ro vider Integrity Electio n Campaign & P ro mises Religio sity, P arty A ffiliatio n P erso nal A cquaintance Amman 3rd Amman 4th Zarqa 1st Irbid 2nd Karak 1st Tafileh 1st Religiosity, an indicator of “Islamist” leaning, was not an important consideration in any of the six surveyed districts, neither was the political stance of the candidate. In Irbid 2nd, Karak 1st and Tafileh 1st, tribal and family affiliations played a much more important role than in the Amman and Zarqa districts under study. But here also tribalism and good service provision dominated the voting culture. 50 39 37 32 30 23 1 9 1 7 1 4 1 4 1 1 21 20 1 6 1 1 4 5 1 6 1 3 6 1 1 7 7 6 1 2 1 1 1 0 6 9 40 Parliamentary Elections EXIT POLL 30 23 22 20 1 4 8 1 1 0 0 5 7 5 10 0 Family, Tribal, To wn A ffiliatio ns Go o d Service P ro vider Integrity Electio n Campaign & P ro mises Religio sity, P arty A ffiliatio n, P erso nal A cquaintance Amman 3rd Amman 4th Zarqa 1st Irbid 2nd Karak 1st Tafileh 1st With the exception of the combined factors of “religiosity and party affiliations” (considered IAF vote indicators) in Amman 3rd district, there were no significant differences between the two tracking surveys and the exit poll. 14 Priorities for the New Parliament Parliamentary Priorities/Exit Poll 30 22 20 16 10 8 16 29 8 0 Priority 1 Priority 2 Priority 3 Priority 4 Priority 5 Priority 6 1 Priority7 Legend 1 Assess impact of certain law drafts on society before adoption 2 Hold government accountable for its program 3 Re-invigorate monitoring role on corruption 4 Propose legislation to government that takes into consideration citizens priorities and concerns 5 6 7 Achieve fair distribution of appropriations amongst governorates Re-invigorate monitoring role on democratization process Re-invigorate monitoring role on foreign policy It becomes obvious from the above graph/results that Jordanians believe the main function of Parliament is to protect citizens’ interests and the public good. This is followed by fighting corruption. In third place, respondents believe that Parliament should hold the government accountable for implementing its program, and make sure that equality and fairness is achieved in the appropriation of funding and financial aid to the various governorates. Parliamentary Elections Free and Fair' The exit poll shows that the majority of those polled in the six electoral districts thought that the elections were free and fair. Over one-third [71.0%] believes that elections were fair to a great extent, with another 24.0% of Jordanians who feel they were somewhat fair VS a small minority of 5.0% who do not believe they were fair. Youth Turnout This is maybe the less bright side of these elections. Youth turnout was well below the national average in spite of national efforts to mobilize this segment of the population to vote. It seems that youth voter mobilization needs to take place on the basis of defined objectives as well as the recognition by youth that they can make an impact through their participation. 15 According to the exit poll in the six survey districts, turnout among youth aged 18-29 was a low 34.0% or 5.0% less than the youth turnout in the municipal elections (39%). Youth turnout (ages 18-29) was generally lower than their preponderance in society and disappointingly less than expected. Tribal Candidates and Tribal Consensus Is the tribal consensus disintegrating' Beside the Islamist defeat in these elections, the apparent breakdown of tribal consensus is the other surprise that will have major implications on the tribal political framework in Jordan in the coming years. A simple look at “same last name” candidates in various districts and we note the severe competition for votes among tribal candidates. In In In In In In In In Amman 4th District there were 4 ‘Hadeed’ and 3 ‘Huneity’ candidates competing. Amman 6th District there were 7 ‘Abbadi/Manasir’ Amman 7th District there were 6 ‘Ajramis’ Irbid 5th District there were 8 ‘Obaidat’, 7 ‘Malkawis’ and 3 ‘Rousans’ Irbid 8th District there were 4 ‘Alawnehs’ and 3 ‘Qur’aans’ Irbid 9th District there were 3 ‘Azzams’ Zarqa 2th District there were 9 ‘Zawahrehs’, 10 ‘Khalylehs’ and 3 ‘Ghweiris’ Bedu Wasat District there were 6 Al Fayez’, 4 “Khraishas”, 4 ‘J’bours’ ….just to name a few districts… One reason behind this trend is the upward mobility of younger tribal candidates resulting from greater educational opportunities and professional training. Perhaps these younger tribal members feel they are entitled to play a bigger role because of their educational and professional status. Second, the real estate boom and the appreciation of land value in Jordan have created strata of “new rich” in many of the more powerful tribes. More money brings greater political ambitions. Third and most importantly is the disappearance of tribal elders and chiefs either through death, incapacitation or erosion of authority. At the same time, the tribes have failed to groom a new generation of leadership. 16 APPENDIX I Tables of Winners and Runner Ups by District 2007 Parliamentary Elections Amman 3rd District : Winners and Runner Ups Muslim Status According to Status According to Candidates Tracking Survey Tracking Survey 4 Seats Wave 1 Wave 2 Oct 25-28 Nov 8-11 Abbadi Sure Winner Sure Winner Al Safadi Likely Winner Likely Beqa’ey Likely Unlikely Al Bustanji Unlikely Unlikely Gharaybeh [IAF] Likely Likely Sultan Unlikely Unlikely Al Sayfi Likely Unlikely Shabaneh Likely Unlikely Hajj Hassan Likely Unlikely Shakhshir Likely Unlikely Qadry Unlikely Unlikely Hamadeh Unlikely Unlikely Christian Candidates 1 Seat Khoury Likely Likely Musharbash Unlikely Likely Qawwas Likely Likely Status According to Exit Poll Nov 20 Sure Winner Sure Winner Likely Likely Sure Winner Likely Likely Likely Likely Likely Likely Likely Actual Status: Winner ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ Sure Winner ▲ 2007 Parliamentary Elections Amman 4th District : Winners and Runner Ups Muslim Status According to Status According to Candidates Tracking Survey Tracking Survey 3 Seats Wave 1 Wave 2 Oct 25-28 Nov 8-11 Al Raqqad Likely Winner Unlikely Winner Abu Zaid Likely Likely Al Hadeed Sure Winner Sure Winner Sa’adeh [IAF] Likely Likely Abul Sheikh Likely Likely Al Hmeysat Likely Likely Abu Ghalyoun Unlikely Unlikely Al Huneyty Unlikely Unlikely Mahfouth Likely Likely Status According to Exit Poll Nov 20 Unlikely Sure Winner Sure Winner Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Sure Winner Unlikely Actual Status: Winner ▲ ▲ ▲ 17 2007 Parliamentary Elections Tafileh 1st District : Winners and Runner Ups Muslim Status According to Status According to Candidates Tracking Survey Tracking Survey 3 Seats Wave 1 Wave 2 Oct 25-28 Nov 8-11 Al Habeeb Likely Winner Sure Winner Hanaqtah Likely Likely Awwad Unlikely Unlikely Al Qaisi Likely Likely A’kaeyleh Unlikely Unlikely Al Hawamleh Likely Likely Al Zarqan [IAF] Unlikely Unlikely 2007 Parliamentary Elections Zarqa 1st District : Winners and Runner Ups Muslim Status According to Status According to Candidates Tracking Survey Tracking Survey 2 Seats Wave 1 Wave 2 Oct 25-28 Nov 8-11 Al Umoush Likely Winner Unlikely Winner Hamdallah Unlikely Unlikely Ghweiri Sure Winner Sure Winner Hayat Mseimi [IAF] Likely Likely M’haisen [IAF] Likely Likely Urabi Likely Likely Al Arafein Unlikely Unlikely Circassian Candidates 1 Seat Boulad Likely Likely Sajajeh Likely Likely Christian Candidates 1 Seat Haddadin Sure Winner Sure Winner 2007 Parliamentary Elections Irbid 2nd District : Winners and Runner Ups Muslim Status According to Status According to Candidates Tracking Survey Tracking Survey 2 Seats Wave 1 Wave 2 Oct 25-28 Nov 8-11 Al Rawabdeh Sure Winner Sure Winner Al Shyyab Likely Likely Sami Khasawneh Likely Likely Moh’d Khasawneh Likely Unlikely Al Shuha Unlikely Likely D’weiri Likely Likely Christian Candidates 1 Seat Raji Haddad Sure Winner Sure Winner Status According to Exit Poll Nov 20 Likely Winner Likely Likely Likely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Actual Status: Winner ▲ ▲ ▲ Status According to Exit Poll Nov 20 Likely Winner Unlikely Sure Winner Likely Likely Unlikely Unlikely Actual Status: Winner ▲ ▲ Sure Winner Unlikely ▲ Sure Winner ▲ Status According to Exit Poll Nov 20 Likely Winner Likely Unlikely Unlikely Likely Unlikely Actual Status: Winner ▲ ▲ Sure Winner ▲ 18 2007 Parliamentary Elections Karak 1st District : Winners and Runner Ups Muslim Status According to Status According to Candidates Tracking Survey Tracking Survey 2 Seats Wave 1 Wave 2 Oct 25-28 Nov 8-11 Thnaibat [IAF] Sure Winner Sure Winner Al Ma’aytah Likely Sure Winner Al S’oub Likely Unlikely Al Shurafa Likely Unlikely Al Mubaydein Likely Unlikely Christian Candidates 1 Seat Abdallah Zraikat Likely Unlikely Fawaz Zraikat Likely Sure Winner Status According to Exit Poll Nov 20 Likely Winner Likely Likely Likely Unlikely Actual Status: Winner ▲ ▲ Likely Likely ▲ 19 Tables 2007 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN JORDAN: Tracking & Exit Polls Conducted in Six Electoral Districts Amman 3rd, Amman 4th, Zarqa 1st, Irbid 2nd, Karak 1st and Tafileh 1st Districts Tracking Surveys Totals Table (1) Q. Do you intend to participate in the upcoming elections on Nov. 20, 2007' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 57.8 26.8 5.3 8.6 1.5 100.0 Amman 4th % 68.4 19.7 4.5 5.9 1.2 0.2 100.0 Zarqa 1st % 69.0 17.5 4.3 7.4 1.6 0.1 100.0 Irbid 2nd % 78.9 16.6 1.5 2.2 0.8 100.0 Karak 1st % 79.4 14.9 2.7 2.6 0.4 100.0 Tafileh 1st % 87.2 9.5 1.3 1.4 0.5 0.1 100.0 Definitely will participate Most probably will participate Most probably will not participate Will definitely not participate Undecided yet Refused to answer Total Tracking Surveys Totals Table (2) Q. Assuming you decided to participate in the upcoming elections on Nov. 20, 2007, would you vote for a political party or an independent candidate' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 7.4 78.9 7.8 0.6 5.3 100.0 Amman 4th % 8.2 79.6 7.9 0.9 3.3 100.0 Zarqa 1st % 7.1 81.5 5.8 0.5 5.1 100.0 Irbid 2nd % 2.4 91.3 4.0 0.3 2.0 100.0 Karak 1st % 9.8 83.9 3.2 0.3 2.8 100.0 Tafileh 1st % 5.4 92.1 1.5 0.2 0.7 100.0 Political party candidate Independent Not sure/Don’t know Refused to answer Will definitely not participate Total 20 Tracking Surveys Totals Table (3) Q. For which political party would you vote' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 71.6 7.4 2.0 1.4 1.4 0.7 14.9 1.4 0.7 100.0 3.7 34.0 1.2 100.0 1.4 8.5 8.3 8.3 20.8 2.0 2.0 6.1 Amman 4th % 59.9 1.2 Zarqa 1st % 88.7 Irbid 2nd % 50.0 8.3 4.2 Karak 1st % 85.7 1.0 3.1 1.9 1.9 7.4 1.9 Tafileh 1st % 87.0 Islamic Action Front People’s Democratic Party/’Hashed’ Jordan Arab Socialist Baathist Party ‘Al Ahed’ Party National Labour Party/’Haqq’ Islamic Centrist Party/’Al Wasat’ National Constitutional Party Not yet decided Refused to answer Other Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Tracking Surveys Totals Table (4) Q. What is your main consideration in choosing your candidate' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 11.6 4.3 18.4 8.1 6.9 0.8 4.2 13.3 10.4 2.1 6.1 6.0 3.3 3.8 0.6 100.0 Amman 4th % 18.8 9.5 16.9 4.3 6.8 0.6 4.7 12.1 6.6 0.3 4.7 6.2 2.2 5.1 1.2 100.0 Zarqa 1st % 12.6 9.7 16.9 5.9 3.2 1.0 4.9 16.1 8.8 1.5 2.7 4.3 3.9 6.7 2.0 100.0 Irbid 2nd % 25.0 10.6 21.8 4.6 3.7 0.2 3.6 9.5 6.0 2.0 2.2 2.5 4.9 2.3 1.0 100.0 Karak 1st % 35.3 9.7 13.9 5.8 2.1 1.4 3.3 9.4 6.3 0.1 1.2 3.1 4.0 3.8 0.6 100.0 Tafileh 1st % 23.5 11.2 21.5 2.2 3.7 0.6 5.7 13.6 5.3 1.2 2.6 1.4 3.9 3.0 0.6 100.0 Family/tribal affiliations From my town/neighborhood Being a good service provider Candidate’s election campaign Campaign promises Political party affiliation His/her religiosity His/her integrity Personal acquaintance His/her political standing on issues Recommended by family Recommended by friend Other Not decided Refused to answer Total 21 Exit Poll Table (1) Q. When did you decide to vote for your candidate' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 10.4 9.8 10.0 69.8 100.0 Amman 4th % 9.4 7.9 7.0 75.8 100.0 Zarqa 1st % 10.4 8.8 10.7 70.0 100.0 Irbid 2nd % 4.6 4.6 10.6 80.2 100.0 Karak 1st % 5.2 7.2 9.7 78.0 100.0 Tafileh 1st % 3.5 2.6 5.8 88.1 100.0 Total % 7.4 6.9 9.0 76.6 100.0 Today Within past 7 days Within past four weeks Over a month ago Total Exit Poll Table (2) Q. What was the main consideration in choosing your candidate' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 10.1 4.0 16.5 9.1 4.2 2.8 8.8 15.6 14.4 2.1 4.8 4.8 2.8 100.0 Amman 4th % 20.8 8.9 18.9 4.2 1.9 1.5 9.1 14.3 9.8 1.2 2.4 4.0 3.1 100.0 Zarqa 1st % 15.1 8.3 20.8 7.2 3.7 1.5 8.1 15.1 9.8 1.5 2.4 2.8 3.6 100.0 Irbid 2nd % 30.4 8.9 13.8 4.1 2.7 5.9 15.8 5.4 1.3 3.2 6.0 2.7 100.0 Karak 1st % 31.5 5.0 11.0 3.8 3.2 2.2 5.5 22.5 7.3 1.2 1.7 0.2 5.0 100.0 Tafileh 1st % 23.2 8.9 19.5 3.0 3.2 0.4 6.7 22.1 4.8 3.2 1.7 0.4 3.0 100.0 Total % 21.6 7.3 16.7 5.3 3.1 1.4 7.4 17.4 8.8 1.7 2.7 3.1 3.4 100.0 Family/tribal affiliations From my town/neighborhood Being a good service provider Candidate’s election campaign Campaign promises Political party affiliation His/her religiosity His/her integrity Personal acquaintance His/her political standing on issues Recommended by family Recommended by friend Other Total 22 Exit Poll Table (3) Q. Do you think that today’s elections were…..' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 70.7 24.6 3.6 1.2 100.0 Amman 4th % 64.6 28.7 3.7 3.0 100.0 Zarqa 1st % 73.0 24.3 1.6 1.1 100.0 Irbid 2nd % 76.1 19.8 2.7 1.4 100.0 Karak 1st % 72.2 21.5 3.2 3.2 100.0 Tafileh 1st % 70.6 22.5 3.9 3.0 100.0 Total % 71.1 23.7 3.1 2.1 100.0 Free & fair to a large extent Free & fair to a fair extent Free & fair to a little extent Not at all free & fair Total 23 Exit Poll Table (4) Q. What should be the first priority of the new parliament' Electoral Districts Amman 3rd % 8.2 Amman 4th % 7.0 Zarqa 1st % 10.9 Irbid 2nd % 6.2 Karak 1st % 7.5 Tafileh 1st % 8.7 Total % 8.0 Assess the impact of new legislation on various sectors of society before adoption Hold the government accountable for implementing its program Re-invigorate the monitoring role of parliament when it comes to corruption Propose draft legislation to the government taking into consideration the priorities and concerns of the electorate/citizens Guarantee the fair distribution of appropriations amongst various governorates Re-invigorate the monitoring role of parliament when it comes to the democratization process Re-invigorate the monitoring role of parliament when it comes foreign policy No answer Total 14.3 18.1 16.6 19.0 14.2 13.8 16.1 26.5 21.4 16.6 22.5 25.7 19.3 22.1 26.6 30.0 32.1 27.1 23.7 31.8 28.5 13.7 14.0 14.7 16.9 18.3 19.7 16.1 7.7 8.9 7.8 7.0 9.3 5.8 7.8 2.7 0.6 1.3 1.4 1.2 0.6 1.3 0.3 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 0.2 100.0 100.0 0.1 100.0 24