“The Public Prosecutor’s Decision to Prohibit Publication at the Preliminary Investigation Stage: Between Alleged Unconstitutionality and the Imperatives of Electronic Administrative Control.”

Abstract

This study examines the Public Prosecutor’s decision to impose a publication ban during the preliminary investigation stage, as one of the most sensitive issues relating to the balance between the requirements of criminal justice and the protection of public rights and freedoms, particularly freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of the press, and the right to access information. The significance of this topic lies in the fact that confidentiality is the governing principle of preliminary investigations, as it serves to protect the proper administration of justice, uphold the presumption of innocence, and prevent undue influence on judges and witnesses. However, the expansion of publication ban orders, especially within the digital environment, raises serious concerns regarding their compatibility with constitutional guarantees and international standards relating to freedom of expression and the circulation of information. Accordingly, the study addresses the legal basis of publication ban decisions, the limits of their legitimacy, and the extent to which they conform to the Jordanian Constitution and relevant international instruments. It also explores their relationship to the concept of electronic administrative regulation in light of technological development and the wide-reaching impact of dissemination through digital media. The study adopts an analytical and comparative methodology through an examination of the relevant Jordanian legal texts, particularly the Penal Code and the Press and Publications Law, while also drawing, where appropriate, on selected applications from Egyptian and French legislation. The study concludes that publication bans may constitute a legitimate exception where they comply with the requirements of legality, necessity, proportionality, and specificity. Nevertheless, the absence of precise legislative controls and the breadth of discretionary authority in imposing such bans may lead to an overreach beyond their intended purpose, thereby necessitating legislative reform capable of achieving a proper balance between safeguarding preliminary investigations and protecting constitutional freedoms within a state governed by the rule of law.