Israeli gas .. Will it put the Jordanian government and parliament in a confrontation?

With the convening of the new Jordanian parliament (the first chamber) on Thursday, a potential confrontation looms, according to observers, between the parliament and the government, the protagonist of which is the gas agreement signed between the Kingdom and Israel in 2016.

With the entry into force of the agreement at the beginning of this year, the popular rejection of it made it a matter of controversy between the government and parliament, but it has not yet been decided due to the end of the session of the previous parliament, and the election of a new council last month.

The agreement signed in 2016 stipulates that Israel will supply Jordan with about 45 billion cubic meters of gas, over a period of 15 years, as of January 2020.

Jordan is a country that is almost a net importer of renewable energy resources such as crude oil and natural gas, and its annual import bill exceeds $ 3 billion, according to official statistical data.

In March 2019, the House of Representatives took a unanimous decision to reject the gas agreement.

However, the Constitutional Court issued a decision at the time, that the agreement "does not require the approval of the National Assembly (both parts of Parliament)."

Because it is signed between two companies, not two governments.

The agreement was signed between the Jordanian National Electricity Company (governmental) and the "Noble Energy" company (operating the Leviathan natural gas field off the coast of Israel).

However, in December 2019, 58 of the 130 deputies signed a memorandum that was unanimously voted in the House of Representatives in January 2020, requiring the government to submit a bill preventing gas imports from Israel.

But the government has not submitted this project until now, which made observers expect to raise the issue again with the new session of the Council.

In the event that the government submits the bill, it will be discussed and agreed upon in the parliament, and its clauses will be agreed upon in the two parts of Parliament, then a majority vote on it, after which it will be referred to the king of the country.

To ratify it before it is published in the Official Gazette, so that it becomes law in force.

And according to what the Jordanian side announced, the agreement will save about 300 million dollars through its purchase of Israeli gas.

By analogy with buying it from global markets.

58 former deputies signed a memorandum, which was voted unanimously, obliging the government to submit a bill banning gas imports from Israel (Al-Jazeera)

Non-binding opinion

Saleh al-Armouti, a member of the House of Representatives and head of the Islamist-led Islah bloc, considered that the Constitutional Court’s decision that the agreement did not require parliament’s approval was "non-binding."

Speaking to Anadolu Agency, Al-Armouti added, "It is the government's duty to present the draft law, which prohibits the import of gas from occupied Palestine, to the Council for discussion and approval, as stipulated in the constitution."

The parliamentarian, who is also the former head of the Bar Association, added, "There is no room for marginalizing our legislative role, which is the basis of our council’s work, and the government must adhere to its constitutionally stipulated role and preserve roles without infringing any authority on the work of others."

No excuses

In turn, energy expert Mubarak Al-Tahrawi confirmed in his speech to Anadolu Agency that from the beginning there are no justifications for signing this agreement with Israel, especially with the presence of many alternatives, and that Jordan has alternatives to Israel to import gas, represented by Egyptian gas, which began its trial pumping quarter ago. The last 2018 is for the Kingdom, in addition to Iraqi and Algerian gas.

Al-Tahrawi stated that "the regional situation in particular and the world in general is not stable, and any long-term agreements in such circumstances have a high risk. Therefore, we will not guarantee Israel's commitment to global gas price changes and to adjust them if they back down."

He added, "This agreement is not in line with the main objective of most national energy strategies, which seek to achieve security of energy supply, especially since the Al-Attar project (under processing in the south of the country) came close to producing 480 megawatts per hour of electricity by direct burning of Jordanian oil shale."

Al-Tahrawi asked, "If the price of gas rises above what is included in the agreement, and Israel refuses to provide Jordan with the same price, can we oblige it to continue pumping?"

Al-Tahrawi ruled out any confrontation between the government and parliament regarding the agreement, especially since it entered into force and the start of the experimental pumping at the beginning of this year, as he put it.

He concluded by saying that the previous council was unable to do anything about the agreement, and "this is also what I expect from the new council, especially since disavowal of the agreement will lead to great losses for the Kingdom."

Jordan has alternatives for Israel to import gas, such as Egyptian gas, which has begun its trial pumping since the last quarter of 2018 in the Kingdom (Al-Jazeera)

Void Agreement

An expert in international law, Anees Qasim, explained to Anadolu Agency that this agreement, as it is guaranteed by the Jordanian government, and the National Electric Power Company is virtually bankrupt, and not legally.

Because the liabilities of it exceed its available assets.

He added that the agreement must be submitted to the National Assembly (the parliament, in its two parts).

Because in the end, it will entail obligations on the Jordanian government, which in turn will pass them on to the citizens, in reference to converting those obligations into taxes that the citizens bear.

Qasim considered that the court’s response regarding the constitutionality of the presentation of the agreement to the parliament was "legally correct for a wrong question," and that the "wrong" question was "Does the agreement between two private companies need to present the issue to the National Assembly? The answer was no."

He added, "If the question was that the (National Electricity) company is in a de facto state of bankruptcy, would that be required to present the agreement to the National Assembly or not? If this question had been, the response of the Constitutional Court would have been different in most cases."

Based on this, the expert, Qassem, concluded that the gas agreement with Israel is null, and the request to cancel it is a project for the parliament.

Because he is aware of the seriousness of Jordan's dependence on Israeli pressure in any future dealings.