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

## TL;DR

This paper analyzes and recommends changes to Jordan's Cybercrime Law to better address character assassination in the digital age.

## Contribution

The paper proposes specific legal amendments to clarify and strengthen Jordan's Cybercrime Law regarding character assassination.

## Key findings

- Jordanian law acknowledges moral character assassination but lacks clarity on criminal liability.
- The law's application to digital interactions remains ambiguous, causing enforcement challenges.
- The study recommends amending Article 16 to include 'moral' and clarify digital domains.

## Abstract

This study seeks to recommend amendments to the Jordanian Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023, especially regarding the character assassination crime. The research mainly deals with the current legal framework's ambiguities by clarifying the legal terms and conceptual boundaries associated with this type of crime. The researchers point out that the law needs to be revised in order to include the current digital communicational channels which sometimes become the places of defamation that cause the loss of moral and reputation, thereby lighting the present ways of moral and reputational harm in the digital world.

The study adopts a desciptive approach to explore the concept of character assassination from the perspectives of law and theory. Furthermore, a legal analytical approach is employed in order to evaluate the applicable provisions of Jordanian law, especially Article 16 of the Cybercrime Law, through the interpretation of statutory language, the identification of gaps, and the assessment of its concordance with general principles of criminal law and international legal systems.

The research findings indicate that Jordanian statutes have clearly acknowledged the concept of moral character assassination which is quite the opposite of the approaches taken in some other legal systems. Yet, the prevailing law still does not give a clear picture on the issue of criminal liability. Who can be considered a perpetrator of such crimes is one of the unclear areas in particular. In addition, the law's relevance to digital and internet-based interactions is still not crystal clear, thus leading to uncertainty as regards both enforcement and legal interpretation.

The research suggests amending the Jordanian Cybercrime Law, specifically Article 16, to make the law more certain and effective. It also recommends to add the word "moral" explicitly and to make the online and digital domains unambiguously referenced so that the law will be able to comprehend present-day reputational harm and adapt to current technological conditions.