This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/24/world/middleeast/jordanians-vote-in-first-parliament-elections-since-protests.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Jordanians Vote in First Parliamentary Elections Since Protests Despite Boycott, More Than Half of Voters Are Said to Turn Out in Jordan Election
(about 7 hours later)
AMMAN, Jordan — Jordanians went to the polls on Wednesday in the first parliamentary elections since protests targeting corruption and calling for greater political freedoms started to spread two years ago, shaking the rule of King Abdullah II. MULEIH, Jordan — Two years ago, Mohamed al-Snaid organized laborers to demonstrate against poor working conditions, helping to start a movement that spread throughout the country and gave voice to a festering anger that has shaken the rule of King Abdullah II.
The monarch, a close ally of the United States, is relying on the elections to quiet his critics and has promised that the contest could usher in the formation of strong political parties and allow the public a greater say in the selection of the government. His critics have dismissed the vote as an attempt by him to avoid yielding any measure of his absolute powers and say it is likely to contribute to a spreading sense of political alienation. On Wednesday, Mr. Snaid took on a very different role, as a candidate in Jordan’s first parliamentary elections since the start of the unrest. He ran despite a boycott of the election by the many members of the protest movement, Hirak, who regard the vote as a public relations exercise by the king and who say that previous Parliaments were weak and unrepresentative.
The country’s main opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated Islamic Action Front, boycotted the vote, increasing the chances that the election would be followed by more unrest. The Brotherhood and other groups that did not vote complained about an election law that underrepresents the kingdom’s majority citizens of Palestinian origin, favoring members of tribes loyal to the king. Standing outside a polling station, Mr. Snaid said that after debating whether to join the boycott, he decided that the best place to fight corruption and economic inequality was from inside the system. Besides, the king asked personally.
At several polling stations in Amman, the capital, campaign workers said turnout was light but that they expected larger numbers later on Wednesday, a holiday. By early afternoon, the election commission’s spokesman, Hussein Bani Hani, said turnout had reached 24 percent of the roughly 2.3 million registered voters, according to the Petra news agency. In all, 1,425 candidates are running for 150 seats in the lower house of Parliament. “He told us to participate to help him with reform,” Mr. Snaid said.
David Martin, the European Union’s chief election observer, told The Associated Press that there was “no intimidation or harassment of voters” and only minor violations related to campaigning outside polling stations. The lines were short, especially in Amman, the capital, but officials said early results showed that 56 percent of the 2.3 million voters who registered turned out, despite the boycott. There were numerous reports of vote-buying but no immediate signs of widespread fraud, which would itself represent a change from charges of interference leveled against the Jordanian authorities in recent parliamentary elections.
Before the vote, many Jordanians complained about the numbers of familiar faces among the candidates, members of previous, feeble legislatures who came to power in elections widely viewed as rigged. In the days before Wednesday’s elections, the authorities announced the arrest of several well-known candidates on bribery charges, though their names remained on the ballots. In the most serious challenge to the credibility of the elections, the country’s main opposition group, the Islamic Action Front, which is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, has joined the boycott, increasing the chances that the election will be followed by more unrest. The group’s leaders have argued that the election law is flawed and underrepresents cities, where most Jordanians live — and where the Brotherhood counts on support, including among Jordanians of Palestinian descent, a majority of the nation’s population.
Outside a polling station in Umm al-Sumaq neighborhood in Amman, two brothers argued about whether the election mattered at all. “It is very important!” said Mansour Naimat, a retired air force officer, as campaign workers handed out fliers directly outside the polling station.  Mr. Naimat said he cast a vote for a candidate who served in a previous legislature, and whose signature achievement, by Mr. Naimat’s reckoning, was wresting a local graveyard from government control. Jordanians approached the polls with trepidation on Wednesday, with some saying that the appearance of so many former members of Parliament on the ballot gave them little faith that the election would provide meaningful change. King Abdullah, a crucial American ally, has insisted that amendments to the election law and other changes would help usher in a new era of pluralism, although many here see him as relying on the vote to fend off the anger in the streets.
His brother, Hassan Naimat, laughed at the contest. “Not a lot of people will vote,” he said. “Eighty percent of the Parliament is coming back. They are the same.”  “We don’t want old faces. We tried that,” said Khalid Hammad, 28, a lawyer who voted in Amman, in support of a friend, a fellow lawyer who was a first-time candidate. Mr. Hammad said that previous Parliaments had been derided for failing to fight corruption or to grapple with demands for social justice
  “We are worried,” he said. “We can help Jordan not go the same way as Syria and Egypt.”

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

In all, 1,425 candidates were running for 150 seats, up from 120, in the lower house — an election law modification that was intended to quiet complaints about a system that rewarded local power brokers. They were often members of powerful tribes rather than national parties. But the Brotherhood and other opposition groups complained that the new law did not go far enough.
At polling stations, voters seemed to be reverting to patterns that had enfeebled Parliament in the past: ignoring issues while voting for friends, relatives or members of their tribe. And the ballot included several candidates who were arrested on bribery charges in the days before the election.

Mohammad Abuarisheh contributed reporting.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: January 23, 2013Correction: January 23, 2013

An earlier version of this article misstated the number of seats in the lower house of Parliament. There are 150, not 120.

An earlier version of this article misstated the number of seats in the lower house of Parliament. There are 150, not 120.