In 2023, women lawyers constituted 31.2% of the total number of lawyers in Jordan, compared to 68.8% men. The percentage of female judges stood at 29.5%, compared to 70.5% male judges, reflecting a gender gap of 37.6%.

Despite the presence of female candidates for both the presidency and council membership of the Jordanian Bar Association, women continue to face cultural and social barriers preventing them from securing positions in union councils without the aid of a quota system. Although quotas are temporary measures to overcome structural barriers and achieve justice, they remain positive and transitional tools to ensure women's representation.

SIGI: Political reform cannot be complete without the active participation of women in public and political life.

Solidarity Is Global Institute-JO (SIGI) noted that the results of the Jordanian Bar Association Council elections revealed the complete absence of female representation. This starkly highlights an expanding gender gap in one of the most prominent and long-standing professional associations in the Kingdom. This absence is particularly striking given that women constitute 31.2% of all lawyers and 29.5% of all judges in Jordan in 2023—demonstrating significant female presence in the justice sector, yet a total exclusion from decision-making positions within the association. This translates to a gender gap of 37.6% in the legal profession and 41% in the judiciary.

This total exclusion of women from the elected council cannot be considered a mere electoral coincidence; rather, it reflects structural and cultural challenges that hinder women's empowerment and their access to leadership positions, even in fields where women have proven high competence and professional standing.

Persistent Gap Despite Competence and Empowerment Efforts

SIGI emphasizes that the recent Bar Council election results bring serious and ongoing questions regarding the effectiveness of efforts to enhance women’s participation. These efforts should not be limited to political institutions, parliaments, and ministerial appointments, but must also extend to professional associations across all disciplines. These associations are expected to be democratic platforms that uphold the principles of justice and gender equality—thus ensuring impactful and dynamic contributions to society.

While women have achieved relatively advanced representation in the judiciary (29.5% of judges), professional unions—especially the Bar Association—remain among the most closed institutions to women’s leadership. This exclusion is attributed to a combination of structural and cultural factors that intersect to restrict women’s presence in the union space, despite their increasing numerical participation in the legal profession. This calls for questions on whether female legal professionals can break the illusory barrier and access key positions within the association, including the presidency.

On one hand, a male-dominated professional culture prevails—reproducing traditional gender roles and implicitly excluding women from influential and representative union roles. On the other hand, there is a noticeable weakness within the union structure in terms of mechanisms for empowering women—whether through leadership development, support for female candidacies within electoral lists, or even the creation of a fair electoral environment that accounts for the challenges women face in representation. Women's roles often remain limited to voters rather than candidates.

Moreover, electoral alliances in unions are frequently shaped by social, regional, personal, and interest-based considerations that tend to marginalize women in favor of male candidates perceived as more capable of mobilization and winning. These dynamics contribute to the weak access of women to decision-making roles in unions, despite their professional qualifications and active participation in daily union activities.

It is also important to note that female candidates may face various forms of negative discourse and stereotyping—particularly in digital spaces—which contribute to creating an unsupportive environment for female candidacies, sometimes even escalating to forms of bullying.

Contradiction with Political and Constitutional Reforms

SIGI points out the paradox of these election outcomes occurring despite Jordan's clear reform path in recent years, and a high-level political will demonstrated through constitutional amendments and the modernization of party and election laws. These efforts contributed to raising women’s representation in Parliament to 19.5%—a percentage still below aspirations but indicative of a political direction that supports women’s participation, aiming for 30% as the minimum threshold for fair representation.

Nevertheless, the absence of women from the council of a major professional association such as the Bar raises questions about the gap between legal texts and actual practices. It presents real challenges to the implementation of gender justice and empowerment principles.

SIGI affirms that the election results must prompt a serious review of practices and procedures that systematically exclude women from professional and union leadership. Women’s representation in decision-making positions should not be viewed as a luxury—it is a necessity for achieving justice and true representation of both genders. It also contributes significantly to improving community and family wellbeing.

As Jordan embarks on its political and constitutional modernization journey, the success of this path hinges on the integration of women as key actors in all areas—political, union-related, and societal.