The Legal Regulation of Cybercrimes related to Character Assassination under the Jordanian and French Legislation

1. The crime of character assassination

The Jordanian Penal Code does not offer a definition for the term “character assassination”, just like the French penal legislation, as pointed out in the study's introduction. This term became part of the Jordanian Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 and is viewed as an “undefined” or ambiguous concept without any specific definition. Its use is generally for the purpose of representing the damage done to a person's ethical reputation.

The concept of moral character assassination was not known to early jurists, as its roots lie in the dissemination of exaggerated or partially truthful information aimed at presenting a distorted and false image of the intended target, whether a natural or legal person (Icks & Shiraev, 2014).

Some define it as “killing a person morally while their body remains alive. This is achieved by creating a mental image that completely contradicts what the person is known for. For example, if a person is reputed for integrity, but rumors are spread accusing them of involvement in financial scandals, they become a victim of moral assassination, causing the public to view them as corrupt or immoral” (Al-Amawi & Balas, 2024).

A ruling by the Jordanian Court of Cassation stated:

A thorough examination of a number of judicial decisions in Jordan reveals that the majority of such cases are related to the crimes of defamation of public authorities. In the latest ruling issued by the Ma'an Magistrates Court in the southern part of Jordan, it is pointed out that: “The act of falsely attributing information to a person, which is considered to be character assassination in violation of Article 16 of the amended Cybercrime Law, the court holds that the writings that the defendant is said to have done consist of all the elements of defamation, slander, and insult but at the same time do not fall under the newly delineated scope of character assassination in the amended Cybercrime Law. As a result, the court proclaims the defendant innocent of this crime, as one of the elements of defamation, slander, and insult is already involved” ( Magistrates Court, 2024). The distinction between defamation and character assassination is underscored by this ruling, which however does not provide a clear definition of the latter. The phrase “character assassination” is included in Article 4 of the Jordanian Integrity and Anti-Corruption Law No. 13 of 2016, which declares:

The Commission aims to ensure adherence to the principles of national integrity and combat corruption through:

The term is also found in Article 68 of the repealed Civil Service Regulation, where the ethical duties of public service staff were illuminated. Furthermore, it is amply cited in Article 13 concerning the Economic and Social Corporation for Military Retirees and Veterans Regulation No. 13 of 2016 and in the Human Resources Management in the Public Sector Regulation No. 33 of 2023.

This indicates that character assassination, as intended by the legislator, is linked to corruption and public administration. We recommend revising Article 16 of the Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 to define the legal meaning of this crime clearly and to remove ambiguity. We also agree with proposals to eliminate the inclusion of joint criminal participation in the previous provision, as it is already addressed in Article 27 of this law. Moreover, narrowing the gap between the minimum and maximum fines for character assassination penalties is advised (Al-Shawabkeh, 2024).

2. The material element of the crime of character assassination

The material element of this crime lies in deliberately, and without justification, spreading, attributing, or ascribing actions to the victim that could lead to character assassination. Linguistically, the term “spread” is defined as “to mention or propagate something,” such as the phrase: “This is widespread news” meaning it has reached everyone and become common knowledge. The term “attribute” means to assign or relate something to someone, as in saying, “Person A attributed the statement to Person B” meaning they related it to them.

In the same respect, Article 16 of the Jordanian Cybercrime Law explicitly states:

The repetition of terms such as “spread” and “attribute” in the legal text is superfluous and unnecessary. The legislator could unify the terminology to improve the legal drafting, using terms like “spread” to describe disseminating information contributing to character assassination.

The statute that mostly governs defamation in France is the one dated July 29, 1881, which is related to press freedom. To constitute defamation, the act of harming or damaging someone's honor or reputation through publicizing or making statements or writings has to be proved as a material element of the crime. Such expressions can be written, oral, or be made known through the media or the internet. The public and the private defamation are the two categories that the French courts set apart, with the latter being restricted to a limited group of people, such as family, friends, and colleagues (de Lamy, 2010).

Internet use in Jordan has become widespread and hence cyber crimes have increased tremendously. The statistics provided by the Cybercrime Unit of the Public Security Directorate indicate that the number of cyber crimes recorded in Jordan increased from 1,320 in 2013 to 16,027 in 2022, over a twelve-fold increase (Maghaireh, 2024). Trends of this nature have been seen globally which have led to the conclusion of a cyber world that is under various threats, including the possibility of terrorist activities (M. H. Khater, 2023).

Some legal scholars are of the opinion that only when the acts constituting the material element of the crime of character assassination will be committed repetitively can the crime be said to exist (Capra et al., 2018). This interpretation originates from the fact that the legislator used the term “acts” in the plural rather than "an act" in the singular. We reject this interpretation, however. By saying “acts” the legislator is referring to the whole collection of prior factors (Al-Rai, 2025).

Consequently, the material element of the crime is established whether the offense is committed through a single act, such as attribution or accusation against the victim, or through multiple acts.

3. The mental element of the crime of character assassination

The psychological aspect of the offense consists of criminal intent, which is a necessary requirement for the actor to purposefully perform an act that is targeted at exterminating the victim's character in a morally wrong way. The intent has to be present even if no harm is eventually done to the victim. The emphasis is placed on the action itself and not the damage caused, if the offender was by all means aware of the wrongful act, intended it, and knew it was illegal (Awan, 2025). This is to say that the criminals are using the internet and other similar platforms unrightfully with complete understanding of the negative effects of their actions on people and society in general (Khater, 2024a). The act must stem from the perpetrator's free and deliberate will. If the perpetrator refrains from completing the act or makes an unintended mistake, the crime is not established. However, the burden of proving such intent falls on the defendant, which can be challenging.

Accordingly, the mental element requires two main aspects:

The French law considers the mental element to consist of both the intent to harm the reputation or dignity of the person affected and the awareness of the defendant that their actions are defamatory. The defendant must also intend to communicate them to others. Public defamation is subjected to more severe penalties than private defamation, with fines up to €45,000 and possible imprisonment in case of racially or religiously biased statements (de Lamy, 2010). The material and mental elements of character assassination have been examined, and legal regulation of this crime requires a more in-depth consideration, which will be subject to research in the second section of this study (Al-Rai, 2025).

4. The legal regulation of character assassination crime

The crime of character assassination in the Jordanian law has given rise to a number of problems, especially because of its likeness to other offenses in the Jordanian law, particularly the recent Cybercrime Law which has addressed libel, slander, and defamation expressly. Some laws in regard to electronic libel and slander use the word “defamation” which is derived from the Arabic word “shahara” meaning to publicize or expose, which in turn implies becoming famous or widely known (Ma’louf, 2005). In terms of definition, defamation is described as “the act of attributing certain material to the victim that causes hatred and contempt from others” (Al-Zoubi, 2023).

The Jordanian Cybercrime Law explicitly addresses defamation in Article 20 Para A:

According to Paragraph (B) of the same Article:

In order to delve deep into the complexities of character assassination as a crime, we first have to look at the differences between this crime and other offenses specified in the Cybercrime Law in the first subsection. The second subsection will make suggestions for improving the legal regulation of character assassination crimes, and then we will wrap up with a collection of findings and recommendations.

5. Conceptual issues and legal distinctions between character assassination, libel and slander crimes

The distinction between moral character assassination, libel and slander crimes exists within the framework of Jordanian criminal legislation, where the Jordanian Cybercrime Law distinguishes between these concepts despite the fact that it does not provide a definition for moral character assassination. This is in stark contrast to other jurisdictions where such distinctions are not made, as moral character assassination, libel and slander are often considered more or less the same under a number of criminal legislations. However, the Jordanian legislator has defined libel and slander crimes explicitly in the Jordanian Penal Code No. 16 of 1960 and its amendments, as it will be detailed later.

Among the most common offenses related to the internet are crimes of libel and slander, and their misuse of technology is the main reason for this. The most important among them is the fact that the internet has countless places like social media, blogs, and websites where people can easily post harmful or offensive information. Consequently, the very nature of crime allows such information to be very rapidly and cheaply distributed to a large audience. Furthermore, it is sometimes the case that offenders are allowed to stay completely anonymous on the internet and this surely gives them the extra freedom of committing such crimes. The situation becomes more complicated by the unceasing monitoring and tracing activities of online content and the huge volume of information and data created every day. Thus, it becomes imperative to resort to the provisions provided in the Cybercrime Law in order to control these crimes.

It is noteworthy that even in States ranked as the top in the freedom of speech and expression category—like the US, Europe, and Australia—are applying very strict laws against defamation (which in many jurisdictions integrates libel and slander). Nevertheless, it should be noted that there is a wide difference between expressing an opinion that is in the public interest and the committing of a defamation crime (Budiartha et al., 2018).

Both electronic libel and slander crimes involve material and moral elements, which will be discussed in two branches before delving into the exceptions to the use of libelous and slanderous expressions under the provisions of the Jordanian Penal Code in a third branch.

6. The material element of electronic defamation and insult crimes

Some scholas define defamation as attributing a specific matter to a person— even in the context of doubt or inquiry — in a way that would harm their honor and dignity or expose them to public hatred and contempt, whether or not the matter constitutes a punishable crime (Heriyanto et al., 2024). This indicates that the material element of the crime of defamation is fulfilled when the perpetrator attributes a specific or defined matter to the victim, causing them to be subjected to public hatred, contempt, and harm to their dignity, honor, and reputation. Thus, electronic defamation is established through the act of attribution to the victim via electronic means, whether the perpetrator fabricated the claims themselves or merely repeated claims they had heard from others (Al-Mashaqbeh, 2025). This is evident in paragraph (a) of Article 15 of the Jordanian Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023, which states: “Anyone who intentionally sends, re-sends, or publishes data or information via the internet, information technology, information systems, websites, or social media platforms that contain false news targeting national security, social peace, defamation, insult, or slander shall be penalized”.

Here, it is not required to explicitly mention the victim’s name; it suffices to provide indications pointing to the victim, as explicitly stated in the Jordanian Penal Code (Al-Rai, AlOmran, & Al Ansari, 2025), which serves as the general legal framework. For example, the Zarqa First Instance Court, in its appellate capacity, ruled:

The material element is thus fulfilled through the acts of sending, re-sending, or publishing any kind of content, whether data—which refers to raw facts and figures that lack independent meaning without context, such as numbers, letters, symbols, or qualitative values (Laudon and Laudon, 2019)—or information, which refers to processed or interpreted data that becomes meaningful and actionable, revealing relationships and insights when organized properly (Stair, R., & Reynolds, 2020).

Defamation may also target a legal entity. Paragraph (b) of Article 15 of the law states: “Crimes mentioned in paragraph (a) of this article shall be prosecuted by the Public Prosecution without the need for a complaint or personal claim if directed against any state authority, official body, or public administration”.

Therefore, three conditions must be met to establish the material element of the crime of electronic defamation:

The swift progression of technology and the digital world are behind the fact that these instances are not the only ones among many. If a defamation action is aimed at a legal entity that stands for a state power, a government body, or a public administrative unit, then the offender might be taken to court without the necessity of a formal complaint or personal claim. This shows the Jordanian legislator's rigorous method of preventing and punishing defamatory statements and ludicrous accusations against public institutions. Meanwhile, an insult does imply the same as the defamation but in a wider and less specific way. The same principles that govern the material element in defamation are also applicable to insult, thus, avoiding repetition.

7. The mental element in the electronic defamation and insult crimes

In order to catch the offender of electronic defamation or insult, it is necessary to the perpetrator's intention that the act would be computed as a crime, and along with that, their knowledge of the action and the possibility of its consequences to the victim's reputation, distress, and even the turning of the public opinion against him/her and subjecting him/her to hatred and contempt. This is clearly illustrated in paragraph (a) of Article 15 of the Jordanian Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 which says: “Anyone who intentionally sends, re-sends or publishes data or information through the internet, information technology, information systems, websites or social media platforms that contain false news affecting national security, social peace, defamation, insult or contempt shall be punished”.

8. Components of criminal intent

In our opinion, there is a mistake in the drafting of this article. The Penal Code, which is the general legal framework, treats defamation, insult, and contempt as separate offenses and provides for different penalties according to the crimes, whereas the article in question regards them as one single offense and applies the same punishment for all three. When applied to insult, the principles regarding the mental element in the crime of defamation equally apply to the crime of insult. To avoid repetition, we will not elaborate further.

9. Exceptions to the use of defamatory and insulting statements

While the Jordanian Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023, under Article 15, prohibits the use, transmission, retransmission, or publication of defamatory, insulting, or contemptuous statements through information networks, technology, systems, websites, or social media platforms. Such prohibitions ultimately aim to protect freedom of expression, preserving human dignity and maintaining social harmony (Khater, 2024b). However, there are exceptions outlined in the Jordanian Penal Code, which serves as the general legislative framework. These exceptions, provided for specific cases, include:

The Amman Court of First Instance, in a case bearing the number 2243 of the year 2002, had the example of a case where a journalist was not found liable of defamation. The court's justification was that the content that was published touched upon issues of public concern related to government financial and administrative irregularities that had already been questioned in the parliament and reported by the media. The complainant was not the article's target but was mentioned in their official capacity, thus the act was not a criminal one.

10. Constitutional protection and legal boundaries

The Jordanian Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to express their opinion through speech, writing, images, or other means. The state is obligated to protect this right, provided the expression adheres to legal provisions. This underscores the balance between protecting individual rights and maintaining lawful boundaries for freedom of expression. In cases where defamatory or insulting language falls within these exceptions, such publications are not deemed criminal under the Penal Code. However, any use of such expressions must strictly comply with the conditions outlined in law to avoid abuse and ensure alignment with constitutional guarantees.

11. Proposed solutions for regulating the legal framework of moral character assassination crimes

The Jordanian Cybercrime Law has a lot of shortcomings in regulating crimes like digital character assassination through various platforms, social media, and modern media. It is clear that this crime is still so to say “unclear” to the Jordanian legal system. It overlaps with other crimes that are defined in laws such as the Penal Code, the Press and Publications Law, the Jordanian Journalists' Syndicate Law, and other acts related to the dissemination of information through digital channels (Al-Zoubi, 2023).

To address these shortcomings, especially those related to digital platforms and modern media, we propose several measures to regulate moral character assassination crimes in Jordanian legislation, as follows:

This can be done through amending the provisions of the Cybercrime Law to explicitly define and delineate the legal concept of moral character assassination. It is also recommended that the legislator provides a comprehensive and precise legal definition to ensure clarity and consistent application.

A special penal framework tailored for media platforms shall be introduced to achieve two primary goals:

This measure is especially significant given that many journalists and media professionals lack adequate legal knowledge in the field of journalism and media.

The current laws are to be evaluated in order to provide strong protection for the people from harm to their reputation. Also, a precise separation between the crimes of moral character assassination and the similar acts like defamation, slander, and contempt will be drawn.

The use of public awareness campaigns is really important in making the public understand the distinctions between moral character assassination and some related offenses, but at the same time they are setting the limits that distinguish this crime from legitimate opinion, criticism, and freedom of expression.

Defamation and moral character assassination impact the media and the public, so legal and ethical issues should be clarified in training programs for journalists and media professionals. These programs would not only support the implementation of the Cybercrime Law but also protect the right to free opinion and expression as stated in Article 15 of the Jordanian Constitution. This article guarantees that every Jordanian can express his/her views without fear, provided the expression is within the law's bounds.

The Jordanian law can more effectively regulate moral character assassination offenses through introducing these measures, thus also making the protection of personal reputations as an aspect of the freedom of expression right. The focus of these crimes is usually the media and press. One has to consider that the issue does not stem from the media institution's structure; rather it is the question of who is the publisher that poses the problem, a journalist or an activist on digital platforms. If the person is a journalist and commits the offense using their digital platform, such as Facebook, Twitter, or any other platform, then he or she will face the penalties based on the “Press and Publications Law” instead of the general legal rules.

However, some criminal law scholars argue that there is no need for a specific legal provision criminalizing these actions, as they are already covered by general laws, such as the “Criminal Code” and the “Jordanian Cybercrime Law”. On the other hand, some believe that only the provisions of the “Press and Publications Law” should apply to journalists and media professionals, regardless of the media institution they work for, with emphasis on financial penalties and the exclusion of custodial sentences. Here, a journalist is defined as a “member of the Jordanian Press Syndicate” as outlined in the definition of a journalist in the Jordanian Press Syndicate Law and the “Press and Publications Law”.

In cases where the perpetrator is not registered with the Jordanian Press Syndicate, which serves as the regulatory body for the profession, the provisions of Article 18 of the Syndicate Law may apply. This article stipulates that:

The researchers believe that amending the “Press and Publications Law” to include all actions related to the journalist’s duties and imposing financial penalties for violations strengthens press freedom on one hand, and ensures journalists are subject to the “Press and Publications Law”, which is a special law for the journalistic and media profession, on the other hand. This should apply to journalists in the legal sense.

In the case of non-membership in the Syndicate, general laws should be applied, such as the “Criminal Code” the “Cybercrime Law” the Telecommunications Law, and any law that criminalizes such actions, as they would then fall outside the scope of crimes related to media and press, regardless of the form, whether traditional or non-traditional media.