Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. Methodology. – 3. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework. – 4. Incrimination of Violation of the Presumption of Innocence. – 4.1 Violation of the Presumption of Innocence through Torture and Coerced Confessions. – 4.2. Violation of the Presumption of Innocence through Disclosure of Investigative Secrets. – 5. Incrimination of Influencing the Proper Administration of Justice. – 6. European Context and Case Law. – 6.1. European Legal Standards on Fair Trial and Media Freedom. – 6.2 ECtHR Jurisprudence on Balancing Media Freedom and Fair Trial Rights. – 6.3 Comparative Perspective: Jordan and Post-Social Legal Transitions. – 7. Conclusions.
ABSTRACT
Background: In the digital era, social media platforms have become powerful spaces for public engagement in criminal justice issues, often influencing perceptions of guilt and innocence. Within this context, the Jordanian legal system faces growing challenges in protecting the integrity of judicial processes from the repercussions of premature or prejudicial online publications. This study investigates the extent to which Jordanian law safeguards key procedural guarantees—namely the presumption of innocence, the confidentiality of investigations, and judicial impartiality—against the influence of social media content and public commentary on criminal cases.
Methods: The study adopts a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology. It critically analyses the relevant provisions of the Jordanian Penal Code, Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023, and Telecommunications Law No. 13 of 1995, alongside related procedural statutes. The research also draws comparative insights from French and Emirati legislation to assess the degree to which Jordanian law aligns with international standards for protecting criminal proceedings from media interference and online bias.
Results and conclusions: Findings reveal that Jordanian legislation does not yet provide sufficiently explicit or comprehensive safeguards to prevent the distortion of justice by public or media pressure. The study highlights significant gaps concerning the protection of investigative confidentiality and the neutrality of judicial authorities. Accordingly, it recommends enacting explicit criminal provisions to prohibit the premature publication of investigative materials, to protect public prosecutors and judges from undue influence, and to increase penalties for unauthorised disclosures. These reforms would strengthen the fairness and independence of the criminal justice system while maintaining a balanced respect for freedom of expression in the digital sphere.