^* This Law was published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 4, dated May 6, 1995, at 8. The translation was prepared for the Yearbook courtesy of Ms Hala Abu Hijleh, LL.B. 1992, University of Jordan; LL.M. 1994, University of London.

^* This law was published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 4, dated May 6, 1995, at 15. Translation into Eng- lish and editorial notes were prepared for the Yearbook courtesy of Ms. Zina Nabulsi, LL.B. 1989, Uni- versity of East Anglia, England; LL.M. 1990, King's College, London. Ms Nabulsi is currently practicing law with Nabulsi & Associates, Amman. I The Palestinian Authority has done well in allocating a separate law for this subject. In the Jordanian "By-Law for the Council of Opinion [Interpretation] and Legislation (Diwan Al Ra'i Wal Tashri), 1993", the procedure for drafting legislative instruments is overshadowed by the internal rules governing the appointment of the members of the Diwan (See, e.g., sections 3-8, 10-12 of the Jordanian By-Law). Fur- ther, it is not clear in the Jordanian By-Law which authority undertakes the initial drafting or suggestion of the required legislation before reaching the Diwan. On the other hand, the Jordanian Diwan may itself initiate the legislative process by suggesting legislative instruments it deems necessary (Section 9/b of the By-Law). This does not seem to be the case under the Palestinian Law. 2 The title of the Law literally translates as "Law Concerning the Procedures for Preparing Legislation" However, the Law applies to all laws, by-laws, regulations and other secondary legislation issued by the Council of the Authority. 3 This is in contrast with the de facto powers of the Jordanian Diwan, the authorities of which exceed draft- ing to rendering opinions on the suitability of the proposed provisions and the purpose thereof.

^* This Law was published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 4, dated May 6, 1995, at 17. Translation into English was prepared by Zina Nabulsi. 1 For the text of that Decree, see 7 Palestine Y. B. Int'l L., at 151 (1992/94).

^* This Law was published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 5, dated June 5, 1995, at 6. The translation into English and the editorial notes were prepared for the Yearbook courtesy of Ms. Luma Saqqaf, LL.B. 1992, University of Jordan; LL.M. 1993, University of Bristol, England. Ms. Saqqaf is currently practicing law with Mjalli Law Firm, Amman.

1 This Organization has not been founded yet.

2 No such designation of zones had been made until the end of 1995. It seems that the idea of dividing the Palestinian territory into these zones can be traced back to the Jordanian Law for Encouragement of Investment of 1987 (which was repealed by virtue of the new Promotion of Investment Law No. 16/95, published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 4075, dated October 16, 1995 at 3229). The aim of dividing Jor- dan into three development zones was to give special incentives including income tax holidays determined by the law which vary according to the relevant zone. The Palestinian Law does not seem to give such spe- cial or additional incentives for each zone.

3 In the three paragraphs dealing with Groups A, B and C. "or" was italicized for emphasis purposes by the Translator. It is not clear if the word "or" was added to provide for an alternative or an additional require- ment. The Board of Directors should clarify this ambiguity when it issues the relevant regulations.

4 It is not clear if the approval of the National Authority is subject to the prior recommendation of the Organization, nor is it clear by this wording if the Organization would approve such a project, but the implementation thereof would not commence until the National Authority endorses it. The regulations that the Board is expected to issue should verify this issue. 5 This is a highly unusual clause. The consent of the investor is made, in effect, superior to the national interest. Furthermore, the first sentence of this Article appears to be in contradiction with the second sen- tence. It could have meant, however, that there shall be agreement between the Organization or the National Authority, on the one hand, and the investor on the other; such agreement would include pay- ment of compensation. The Jordanian Law, in contrast, provides that there shall be no expropriation, except for the purpose of public interest against payment of adequate compensation which shall be in convertible currency in the case of non-Jordanian investors.

6 In the original text, it appeared "Part Nine" which is not correct. The following numbering of Parts was corrected accordingly. While the Jordanian Law gives the investors the option to either resort to Jordanian courts or the Interna- tional Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, the Palestinian Law has not provided for options. It would have been more convenient for investors if the Law had resolved to utilize the UNCITRAL model of arbitration.

^* This law was published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 6, dated August 29, 1995, at 11. Translation into English and editorial notes were prepared for the Yearbook courtesy of Ms. Sanaa A. Obeidat, LL.B. 1992, University of Jordan, Amman; LL.M. 1994, McGill University, Montreal. Ms Obeidat is currently practising law with the Law and Arbitration Centre, Amman, Jordan. 1 See supra, at 117. 2 See The Laws of Palestine, Vol. II, at 1214 (1943). This Law (Ordinance) was enacted by the High Com- missioner in Council during the British mandate over Palestine. 3 See the Official Gazette (Jordan), issue No. 1987, dated February 21, 1967, at 289. This Law had been superseded by Law No. 10 of 1993 published in the Official Gazette (Jordan) issue No. 3891, dated April 17, 1993, at 713 (hereinafter the "Jordanian Law"). This last legislation has influenced, to a large extent, the Palestinian Law as it will be highlighted in the following notes.

4 Contrary to the Jordanian Law, this Law does not provide for membership in the Journalists' Association as a condition for being considered a journalist. The omission of this requirement, in the absence of any other legislation imposing the condition that a journalist must be of a Palestinian nationality (as is the case of the Law of the Jordanian Journalists' Association) seems to imply that such nationality condition is not required under this Law.

5 The comparison between the texts of the two laws, the Jordanian and the Palestinian Laws, on this matter reveals a more relaxed attitude on the part of the Palestinian legislator in this regard. The corresponding provision (Article 10) of the Jordanian Law adds the words "or external entity". These words were omit- ted from the text of this paragraph (a) and substituted by paragraph (b) of the same Article, which is con- cerned with support from external "non-governmental entities" The Jordanian Law, however, contains another related provision which the Palestinian legislator chose not to reproduce in this Law. The said provision (Article 44 of the Jordanian Law) prohibits all persons concerned in a press publication from receiving or accepting "any assistance or financial grant from any local or foreign entity" except with the approval of the Minister of Information. Thus, while the Jordanian Law provides for an absolute prohibi- tion in respect of foreign sources of financing, whether governmental or non-governmental, and requires the approval of the Minister for all other forms of local or foreign assistance, the Palestinian Law only absolutely prohibits foreign governmental aid.

6 Under the Jordanian counterpart of this Law, the nationality condition is not provided for in the corre- sponding Article (13) since a chief editor of a Press Publication, unlike that of a Specialized Publication, is required to be a journalist. The nationality condition is underlying in the requirement to be a journalist since the Law requires compliance with the conditions provided for in the Law of the Journalists' Associa- tion. See supra note 4. Adopting the same course in the Palestinian Law, in spite of the difference in the definition of the journalist, creates a gap in this provision which may be interpreted as not requiring the nationality condition. 7 Deliberations of the Jordanian House of Parliament on the corresponding provision (Article 13(d)) of the Jordanian Law indicate that what is intended by the term "function" in this text is regular paid employ- ment and not just any paid or unpaid undertaking that may be occasionally performed by the chief editor. Supplement of the Official Gazette (Jordan), vol. 29 issue No. 21, dated August 19,1992, pp. 17 et seq.

8 The evaluation of the experience of the responsible manager was not left to the discretion of the Minister as in the Jordanian Law. See Article 16(c)(1) and (2) of the Jordanian Law. 9 Id.

10 This Law does not include a prohibition, similar to that which is included in Article 19(c) of the Jordanian Law, in respect of granting licences for the Government and public official corporations for issuing press publications. Also, it does not provide for a maximum limit for the participation of the Government or such corporations in the capital of journalistic companies. Cf. Article 19(d) of the Jordanian Law. 11 The Jordanian Law adds "[a] non Jordanian may not participate or hold shares in a journalistic company" The new Palestinian law seems, in comparison with its Jordanian counterpart, much more relaxed in regard of the nationality and residence conditions. While the Jordanian law restricts the right to own peri- odical publications to Jordanians residing in Jordan and expressly precludes non-Jordanians from partici- pating or holding shares in a journalistic company, the Palestinian law allows a Palestinian who does not have residence in Palestine to own a periodical, provided he/she obtains the approval of the Ministry of Interior (see Article 16 supra), and it does not provide for any nationality-related restrictions on holding shares in journalistic companies.

12 This provision seems to give the Director General of Press and Publication a larger authority than that which is provided for in Article (32) of the Jordanian Law. The latter defines the measures that may be taken by the Director by authorizing him/her to "prohibit entry of the publication to the Kingdom either permanently or for the period that he/she deems appropriate". The power of the Director under this pro- vision, on the other hand, may extend to several other measures such as, for example, closing the offices of the foreign publication in Palestine or prohibiting its correspondents from working therein.

13 Articles (34,) (35) and (36) were introduced into this Law to substitute for Article (39) of the Jordanian Law which reads: An owner of a Bookstore, Distribution House or Publishing House shall, prior to the distribution or sale of any publication that he/she imports from outside the Kingdom, provide the Director with a copy of each such publication in order for the latter to authorize such distribution or sale. The Director may refuse to issue the authorization and he/she may prohibit the entry of the publication to the Kingdom if he/she deems that the circulation thereof will harm public interest. The owner of the Bookstore, Distribution House or Publishing House may challenge the decision of the Director before the High Court of Justice. Articles 34-36 of the Palestinian law seem to lay more restrictions on the freedom of the press since they require authorizations and licences for every act that is related to the importation or sale of publications. Article (35) applies, not only to institutions governed by this law, but also to ordinary persons ("any per- son") who wish to import a publication from outside Palestine "even if for once". The wording of the pro- vision in this manner, in addition to the fact that reference to the sale of publications is made in a separate provision, may be interpreted as prohibiting an ordinary person from ordering any foreign magazine by mail from abroad without first notifying the Ministry two weeks in advance and obtaining an authorization therefrom in this regard. 14 Id. 15 Id.

16 The penalties imposed in this Article and the following Articles which concern crimes committed in viola- tion of this law are stricter than those imposed by the Jordanian Law, both in regards to the amount of the fines and the duration of the imprisonment periods. In most of these provisions, this Law also introduces the power of the court to combine the fine and imprisonment penalties. The application of this combined penalty, however, may prove to be impossible in practice, as in the case of a corporate person where it would not be possible to execute the imprisonment penalty. This inaccuracy in the drafting of these provi- sions seems to be most apparent in Article (46) where it is expressly provided that a corporate owner of a printing press may be subject to the imprisonment penalty.

Editor's Note * Published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 4, dated May 6, 1995, at 54. Translation was prepared for the Yearbook. All Notes are added by the Editor. The translated text varies from the text that was originally released from the "Office of the President" and dated February 7, 1995 (herein the "Original Text") (Copy on file with the Editor). The Original Text was a Decree not bearing any number, citing articles 23 and 59 of the Constitutional Order, and listing the crimes set out in Decree No. 555 of 1957. The omission of these references from the text published herein is significant as highlighted in the notes added below. Two Chambers of High State Security Courts have been established; one in Gaza and the other in Jericho. As of end of 1995, at least (47) persons have been tried, (45) of whom were convicted by these two courts with penalties ranging from two months imprisonment to life sentence. Virtually all of these cases (except for 4) involve activities directed at the Israeli occupation and Israeli settlers. The Palestinian Independent Commission for Citizens' rights (PICCR), Al-Haq, The Gaza Center for Human Rights and Amnesty International, among other human rights organizations, have criticized the establishment of this type of courts in the autonomous areas. They all expressed their respective views that the establishment of State Security Courts is an encroachment on the rule of law, the principle of the inde- pendence of the judiciary and violation of the basic human rights of accused persons. They further referred to the abusive procedures pursued by the Courts whereby trials are sometimes conducted after mid-night, in a summary manner, and without a properly appointed attorney. See infra at 227. 1 Text of this Decree was translated into English and reproduced in 7 Palestine Y.B. Int'l L. at 151 (1992/94). This paragraph did not appear in the Original Text which provided: "having considered Articles (23) and (59) of the Constitutional Order of the Gaza Strip published on March 5, 1962 ....". Article (23) provides that all judgments rendered by this type of courts must be endorsed by the Governor General (in this case the chairman of the Palestinian Authority), who has the powers to decrease the penalties or to pardon the con- victed person. This article implies that such judgments are not subject to appeal or review by a higher court. It seems that since this Decree (49) was prepared in haste, the drafters overlooked the fact that Decree No. 1 of 1994 is now the basic legislation that the Palestinian Authority is relying on in issuing new enact- ments. The validity of Article (23) remains, impliedly, in full force and effect. 2 This legislation was introduced by the Egyptian authorities and published in the Official Gazette (Gaza), Extraordinary issue dated March 29, 1962. Reference here is made only to Article 59 which deals with the establishment of military tribunals by order of the Egyptian Governor General of Gaza.

3 Reference to this Decree appears also in the Original Text. It is an Egyptian enactment that was published in the Official Gazette, issue No. 256 dated December 31, 1964, at 1930. This Decree deals with the forma- tion of military tribunals, its jurisdiction and other procedural matters. However, the most salient feature of this Decree is that it was enacted on the force of , inter alia, the Emergency Defence Regulations of 1945 which have been universally criticized due to their arbitrary and abusive characters. 4 Names omitted in the translation. The Original Text however did not list the names of the officers who will man the court; it rather provides for the designation of a "grand officer" to preside over the tribunal and the membership of two less-ranking officers. This language was copied from the Egyptian Decree No. 55 referred to above. It seems that after the release of the Original Text, that embarrassing language was corrected. The language used in the Egyptian Decree in turn borrowed expressions that were used during the Ottoman era. 5 The Original Text shows that it was issued on February 7, 1995, while the published text, as translated herein, shows that that it was published on February 16, 1995. Ironically, the text provides that the Decree would come into effect as of its release and not as of its publication in the Official Gazette.

^* Translation into English and the editorial notes were prepared for the Yearbook courtesy of Ms Hala E. Nasser, LL.B. 1988, Unviersity of Jordan; LL.M. 1989, London School of Economics; and Mr. Ayman A. Abdel-Khaleq, LL.B., 1993, University of Jordan; LL.M., 1994, George Washington University. Both law- yers are currently practising law with Elias Nasser and Associates Law Offices, Amman. The draft law was sent to the Lower House of Parliament on February 14, 1995, to be on the agenda of the House on its final ordinary session which was scheduled to take place on February 20. On that day and unexpectedly, opposition deputies, mainly Islamic Action Front, Leftist and Pan-Arabist, boycotted the session, thus depriving it from its quorum. This move would have been minor, hadn't some pro-peace dep- uties been absent, since the opposition numbers 23, and thus could not deny quorum. The session was left with 50 deputies, 4 deputies short of the 54 needed. Opponents of Treaty and Repeal of Law Thwart House Session, Jordan Times, Feb. 22, 1995, p.l, cols. 2-4. The Constitution of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan provides in article (84); "(i) No meeting of either House shall be considered duly constituted unless attended by two-thirds of the members of either House, and shall continue to be valid as long as an abso- lute majority of the members of either Houses is present". Conversely, and in an attempt to circumvent the constitutional parliamentary procedure, 44 pro-gover- ment deputies signed a petition and sent it to His Majesty the King; the petition called for the convening of an extraordinary session and specified the draft legislations to be included in the agenda, out of which was the economic boycott draft legislation. The Royal Decree which called the Parliament to be convened set the agenda for the session, which included the draft law in caption. In the first meeting of the Lower House of the Parliament, and after a heated debate on the constitutionality of the session and its agenda, Deputy A. Dughmi, President of the Legal Committee, announced that the session was constitutional since it did not exclude any of the main topics that the deputies wanted to discuss. Lower House of Parlia- ment Opens Extraordinary Session, Jordan Times, June 13,1995, p.l, cols. 2-4. The Parliament was convened for an extraordinary session on June 28, 1995, when the draft law was debated at length. The pro-government deputies argued that the draft should be logically adopted as it was dictated by the Peace Treaty with Israel. Another school of thought argued that the draft should be amended to provide for reciprocity. Mr. Taher Al-Masri, the former prime minister, citing the facts that 93% of Israel's lands are owned by the state itself or through its agencies; that Israel's law of 1960 prohib- its the transfer of title to land to any entity other than to those of the state's agencies; and that according to the transfer Law of 1980, no privately-owned land could be sold to foreigners, asserted that reciprocity must be incorporated into the new law. On that point, Mr. Masri explained that if Jordan is required to amend certain laws to be consistent with the Treaty, Israel, likewise, is expected to do the same. The third trend, led by the Muslem Action Front deputies, strongly criticized the draft mainly because they opposed the Treaty. For the debate, see The Parliamentary Record, Vol. 32, No. 6, dated June 28, and July 26, 1995. The draft law, as subsequently amended by the Finance and Legal Committee of the House, was ultimate- ly carried by a majority vote of 51 to 21 on July 26,1995. The Senate debated the law as adopted by the Lower House. The Law was carried by a majority of 30 to 3. The Senators who voted against were Mr. Abdel Majeed Shoman, Dr. Abdul Latif Arabiyyat and Thou- qan Al-Hindawi. Mr. Shoman, argued that "the ending of the boycott [of Israel] would not have a positive effect on Jordanian companies and the Jordnaian economy m general. To endorse it at present is prema- ture because I see that peace with Israel has not been completed yet, especially on the Syrian and Palestin- ian -Israeli tracks." He further cited the fact that the boycott was a decision "taken by the Arab League and thus should be rescinded" by the League itself. Jordan Times, August 1, 1995, p.l, cols. 6-8. The law was finally endorsed by H. M. the King and published in Jordan's Official Gazette issue No. 4062 dated August 16, 1995, at 2402.

1 This article is one of two substantive articles which were introduced by the Joint Finance and Legal Com- mittee of the Lower House of Parliament with the aim of ensuring the ultimate safeguard of the rights of the citizens and the integrity of Jordanian lands. The first paragraph establishes the principle of reciproc- ity. The Committee further recommended that the government should present a draft of an anti monopoly and protection of national economy law and, further, to pursue its efforts aiming at safeguarding Jordanians' rights and property in Israel. 2 Text in Official-Gazette issue No. 1134 dated February 16, 1953, at 558. Article (1) provides that a non- Jordanian may not lease real property for a period or periods exceeding three years until he obtains the prior approval of the Council of Ministers. Article (3) allows foreigners (other than citizens of an Arab country) to own real properties within municipal zones for the purposes of residence or for business but not for commercial transactions.

3 Text in Official Gazette, issue No. 1140, dated April 16, 1953, at 683. This law, as amended, allows charita- ble and religious entities to own within the municipal boundaries, properties that are necessary for their respective operations. Foreign corporations, likewise, may own, within the municipal boundaries, proper- ties that are needed for their business, provided that they obtain the approval of the Council of Ministers. In all events, such entities are not allowed to deal with real properties in commercial manner except with the prior approval of the Council of Ministers. 4 Deputy Talal Obeidat, during the voting session of the Lower House of Parliament, expressed his con- cerns regarding the reciprocal treatment issue. He said that Israel, the other party in the Peace Treaty, has not until that moment introduced a draft law to the Knesset to that effect. This, in the opinion of deputy Obeidat, bears more significance as we know that a large number of Israelis are of a dual nationality. American laws for example grant non-Americans the right to buy property. This means that Israelis with dual nationality would benefit from this situation, and apply to own or lease lands in Jordan on the basis of their second nationality, i.e. the one that grants reciprocity. The Parliamentary Record, the Extraordi- nary Sess. July 26,1995, at 109-110. 5 Senator Zeid Al-Rifa'i criticized the draft's trend towards regulating investment issues. Senator Rifa'i, while agreeing with the majority that the law is essential, expressed his opinion that "it doesn't make sense if an investor comes , and we want to encourage investment, and asks the Minister of Industry and Trade to inform him of the [investment] laws and the Minister passes him over a law called: The Law of Econom- ic Boycott and Banning of Dealing with the Enemy[!]", The Senate Endorses the Draft Law of Economic Boycott and Prohibition of Dealing with the Enemy, Al Dostour, August 1, 1995, at 26 cols. 1-2. On the other hand, Senator Jawad Anani, adopted a different opinion when he stated that "the Lower House suc- ceeded in striking a balance between encouraging investment and securing the stability and safety of the country" adding further that " The draft law should be viewed as part and parcel of the investment related legislation", Id., p. 27, cols. 7-8.

6 Article (7) was the second substantive article (beside article 6) introduced by the Lower House of Parliament's Joint Finance and Legal Committee, also with the aim of ensuring the security of Jordanian lands and protecting the rights of Jordanians. 7 Text of the Treaty infia at 281. 8 Senator Thouqan Hindawi, proposed another amendment; this time to article (7). The amendment reads: "The Prohibition of Sale of Property to the Enemy law No. 30 of 1973 shall remain in force in relation to lands mentioned in paragraph 2 of article 3 of the Peace Treaty, until the fate of these lands is determined in the final settlement between the relevant parties and Israel". Senator Hindawi reasoned that the origi- nal articles do not provide any guarantee against the transfer of Arab lands to Non-Arabs in Jerusalem and the West Bank. The Senator gave the following hypothesis; "Does that [article (7) in the original draft] mean that a non-Jordanian buyer, whether an Arab or non-Arab may, after obtaining the permis- sion of the Council of Ministers to buy the lands, transfer the ownership of the property that he/she bought to any other party?". The Senator further suggested that Jordanian laws shall continue to apply to these lands, despite the disengagement between Jordan and the West Bank, since these lands are occupied under Jordanian laws. Finally the Senator expressed the view that his two amendments (the other one being that pertaining to article (6)) should be incorporated in order to protect Jordanian and Arab lands, and prevent Israel from controlling them. Al Dostour, August 1, 1995, p.26, cols. 1-6. 9 Text in Official Gazette, issue No. 2429, dated July 1, 1973, at 1223. This law defined "enemy" as "every person, natural or juridical, who holds an Israeli citizenship, resides in Israel or works for it." 10 Text in Official Gazette, issue No. 1370, dated February 18, 1958, at 178. This Jaw along with the Arab Boycott regulations were translated into English and published in 4 Palestine Y.B. Int'l L. 359 (1987/88) and 3 Palestine Y.B. Int'l L. 189 (1986). 11 Text in Official Gazette, issue No. 1143, dated May 16, 1953, at 693.