BACKGROUND

Municipal elections were held in Jordan on July 31, 2007, the first elections since 1999 in which mayors and municipal council members were directly elected (with the exception of the capital Amman which will continue to have an appointed mayor and half appointed municipal council.)

2,720 candidates competed for a total of 965 seats in 93 municipal councils including mayors and municipal councilors. Female candidates were guaranteed a minimum of 220 of those seats under a 20% quota for women. (Figures according to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs.)

In addition, approximately 150,000 youth became eligible voters under the 2007 amended law which reduced the voting age from 19 to 18. Candidate registration took place on July 22-24. The official campaign period lasted six days from July 25 -30.

In the early afternoon on Election Day, the opposition Islamic Action Front (IAF) withdrew all 33 of its municipal candidates from the elections in response to what the party described as rigging by the government. The IAF accused the Jordanian authorities of using army personnel for duplicate voting in favor of pro-government candidates with buses carrying plain-clothed soldiers from polling station to polling station. (Military voting was allowed for the first time during these municipal elections.)

According to official statistics, the total turnout nationwide was 56.0%.

This is the first exit poll in Jordan’s history and the fourth in a series of surveys conducted by the Jordan Center for Social Research (JCSR) and its partners that focuses on local governance in the Kingdom. The exit poll was conducted in six electoral districts in six municipalities located throughout the country varying in size and composition of population: Hasa in Tafileh Governorate; Karak (Main City district); Madaba (Main City district); Oyoun in Ajloun Governorate; Irbid (Barha district) and Rusaifeh in Zarqa Governorate (Rashid district.)
[See Appendix I for map and description of electoral districts.]

The exit poll was conducted during polling hours in a total of 37 polling stations in the six electoral districts. Polls were open on Election Day from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm. 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.

With this poll, JCSR and its partners hope to shed light on voting patterns, voter behavior and electoral culture in Jordan’s 2007 municipal elections for the benefit of decision makers, elected officials and the general public.


MAIN FINDINGS

Summary

Tribalism Still Dominates, But Undecided and Swing Voters Matter

The exit poll shows that two-thirds of voters had already decided on their candidate for mayor over a month before Election Day.
In many cases, winning candidates had secured tribal and family consensus well before the elections. Therefore, it is doubtful that any decisive shifts away from these candidates could have taken place in the run-up to Election Day. However, in certain districts where the races were very close, “undecided” and “swing” voters
could have had an influence on the outcomes.
[See page 4 for more information on “undecided” and “swing” voters.]

An official campaign period of only six days limits the influence of issue-driven election campaigns over voters’ decisions. However, we can see an upward trend in the importance of campaigns and issues in these elections when compared to previous elections. Allowing a longer campaign period could shape electoral behavior in Jordan by allowing candidates to influence voters through more relevant and meaningful issue-driven electoral programs. These types of campaigns could affect “neck-and-neck” races by attracting “undecided” or “swing” to one competitor or another.

Did the IAF Jump or was it Pushed Out of the Elections?

Exit poll runs taken at 10:00 am and 1:00 pm on Election Day show that most IAF candidates were losing by a wide margin to their independent/tribal competitors, particularly in cities like Madaba, Rusaifeh and Irbid where a greater IAF presence is supposedly felt. This poor showing could have been a contributing factor in the IAF’s decision to boycott half way through the elections under the pretext of rigging by the government. The results could also be interpreted as an indication of a declining “Islamist” support in places where the IAF traditionally has been strong.

Youth Voters and Women Voting for Women: Where Were They?

Youth turnout was lower than their share of the population. Turnout for women was representative, however the numbers of women voting for women and men voting for women were disappointingly low.



To read the full report in English or Arabic, please follow the link or download the related file.