These controversial laws have triggered a lot of legal, political and social debate. As this is not a forum for debate, here is merely an update on some of the most pertinent aspects of these laws.
- Landlords and Tenants Law number (11) for the year 1994:
The highly controversial Landlords and Tenants Law number (11) for the year 1994 was initially amended in 2000 and has undergone several flopped amendments (the latest in 2011) which all strived at coming up with a formula that is fair to both landlords and tenants.
The latest amended Law entailed a number of amendments, among which, the most controversial is article (5/A-B) which stipulates that a tenant is entitled to continue utilizing the rented real property beyond the contractual duration agreed upon, according to the same provisions and conditions of the tenancy contract, if the contract was signed before 31/8/2000. However, once this Law goes into effect, the rental fee should be amended in line with an agreement between the landlord and the tenant. If the landlord and the tenant do not reach an agreement on a new rental fee; one or both may refer the matter to Court. The Court ultimately sends a team of experts to assess the comparable rent taking into account the location of the rented property and other factors. The ruling should be issued within six months. It is final and binding.
All contracts concluded on or after 31/8/2000 are governed by the conditions of the contract and shall terminate on the date that has been agreed upon therein.
This Law has initiated a social storm of criticism in particular with regards the Court's sole power to determine the comparable rent according to an expert's assessment which may be prejudiced and opinionated. The debate, controversy and challenging rallies, by both landlords and tenants, are still going on.
- Elections Law for the year 2012:
A Royal Decree was issued recently to ratify this Law. Under article (8/C) of this Law, each voter will be given two votes; one for a candidate at the district level and another for a closed proportional list that will compete for 17 seats at the national level (12 per cent of the 140- member Lower House). The Law is criticized for being a slightly cosmetic version of the one person- one vote system. Also, the number of seats allocated at the national level is viewed to be insignificant to create any difference.
Not long, the Government has endorsed an amended version of the 2012 Elections Law, raising the number of parliamentary seats allocated for the national list to 27 instead of 17. As such and according to the amendment, the next Lower House of Parliament will consist of 150 seats instead of 140 as previously endorsed. The Government referred this to Parliament, as the extraordinary session of Parliament started on July 8, 2012, and as of today both the Lower and Upper Houses of Parliament have approved the amendment.
- Draft Political Parties Law for the year 2012:
The Law is still being examined by both Houses of Parliament. The Upper House insists that the minimum number of founding members required to form a political party be raised to 500 instead of 250 as proposed by the Government and approved by the Lower House.
One striking aspect of the draft Law is found in its article (4) which stipulates that parties could not be established on the basis of religious, ethnic, racial or regional considerations or on the basis of religious or racial discrimination. The Islamic Action Front, among other parties and activists, expressed concern with regards the authorities controlling the ethnic or religious nature of any organization in a reform- related legislation.