The Crime of Online Fraud in Jordanian Law: Article 10 and Its Penalty
A transfer to an online store that does not exist, a link that appears to come from a bank, or an impersonated account asking for an "urgent" sum in the name of a relative or friend: facts of this kind leave two parties facing the same anxiety, a victim who wants to know what will become of their money, and a respondent facing a charge of fraud committed over the internet. In Jordan today these facts are governed by a specific provision, Article 10 of Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023, which made online fraud an independent crime punishable by imprisonment for not less than one year and a fine of 5,000 to 25,000 Jordanian dinars (JOD), alongside Article 417 of Penal Code No. 16 of 1960 and its amendments, which governs fraud in its traditional form. The difference in penalty between the two provisions is large, and a single set of facts may support more than one legal description, which is why a lawyer specializing in cybercrime settles the article on which the case will be built before any statement or complaint is made.
1. Online Fraud Is an Independent Crime Under the 2023 Law
Online fraud, or digital fraud as it is sometimes called, is the taking of another person's property by deception through an electronic means. Paragraph (a) of Article 10 of the Cybercrime Law describes it as a person taking, for themselves or for another, without right, movable or immovable property or a document containing an undertaking or a release, by using a fraudulent method, adopting a false name or impersonating a false capacity, through the information network, an information system or any information technology means. Its penalty is imprisonment for not less than one year and a fine of not less than 5,000 dinars and not more than 25,000 dinars. Paragraph (b) of the same article punishes an attempt to commit this crime with the penalty prescribed for the completed crime.
Some writing still repeats the claim that Jordanian law does not recognize an independent crime of online fraud, and that fraud over the internet is punished under Article 417 of the Penal Code alone through a "bridge article" in the Cybercrime Law. That claim does not hold under the law in force. The 2023 Law, in its Article 40, repealed Cybercrime Law No. 27 of 2015 and gave online fraud its own provision and its own penalty in Article 10. As for Article 26 of the Law, which provides that whoever commits, by electronic means, a crime set out in another statute is punished with the penalty prescribed in that statute, it applies only to crimes not addressed by a provision of the Cybercrime Law itself, and online fraud is addressed by a provision.
Article 15 of the Law is sometimes credited with a role in fraud cases. In fact, it punishes sending or publishing material containing false news that targets national security and social peace, or the defamation (dhamm), slander (qadh) or insult (tahqir) of any person through electronic means, and it has no connection with taking property. The firm covers the scope and penalty of that article in a separate article on Article 15 and online defamation and slander. Confusing the two articles has a practical consequence: a complainant may build the complaint on a provision that does not apply to their facts.
2. The Elements of the Crime of Online Fraud Under Article 10
The crime exists only when its material element and its mental element come together, and each part of them is studied separately when the file is read.
The material element. It is made up of three components. The first is the means of deception, which the provision limits to three forms: a fraudulent method, adopting a false name, and impersonating a false capacity. The second is the electronic medium through which the deception passes, whether a website, an application, a message or an account on a social platform. The third is the result, namely the taking of the property or the document, with a causal link that makes this taking the direct outcome of the digital deception and not the result of some other cause.
Because an attempt is punished with the same penalty, a case may stand even if the money transfer was never completed. This is a point the lawyer weighs in both directions: for the victim who believes that not having lost the money removes their right to complain, and for the respondent who believes that not having received anything exempts them from liability.
The mental element. Online fraud is an intentional crime, requiring that the offender knows that what they are using is a means of deception and intends to take another person's property without right. A case may begin as an ordinary commercial dispute: goods that were not delivered, or a service not performed as agreed. Distinguishing a breach of a civil obligation from criminalized deception is among the most delicate questions a lawyer examines, because proof of intent is what turns the facts from a financial dispute into a crime punishable by at least one year's imprisonment.
3. Article 10 and Article 417: Comparing the Two Provisions
Article 417 of the Penal Code is the general provision on fraud, and it does not require any particular means. It punishes anyone who induces another to hand over movable or immovable property or an instrument containing an undertaking or a release and takes it fraudulently, by using fraudulent methods, by disposing of property knowing they have no capacity to dispose of it, or by adopting a false name or a false capacity. The following table sets the two provisions side by side:
| Point of comparison | Article 417 of the Penal Code | Article 10 of the Cybercrime Law |
|---|---|---|
| Means | Fraudulent methods, disposing of property the offender has no capacity to dispose of, or a false name or false capacity, whatever the tool | A fraudulent method, a false name or impersonating a false capacity, through the information network, an information system or any information technology means |
| Object of the crime | Movable or immovable property, or an instrument containing an undertaking or a release | Movable or immovable property, or a document containing an undertaking or a release |
| Basic penalty | Imprisonment from six months to three years and a fine of 200 to 500 dinars | Imprisonment for not less than one year and a fine of 5,000 to 25,000 dinars |
| Aggravation | Imprisonment for not less than two years if the act is committed on the pretext of securing a job or work in a public administration, and not less than three years if the offender is one of those responsible for issuing shares, bonds or securities of a company or project; double the penalty where there are multiple victims or where the victim's disability is exploited | The penalty is doubled under Article 28 if there are multiple victims, if crimes under the Law are repeated, if the offender exploits their position or powers, or if the crime is committed in the interest of a foreign state or an unlawful organization |
| Attempt | Punished with the same penalty | Punished with the penalty prescribed for the crime itself |
Two rules govern the relationship between the two provisions. The first is in paragraph (2) of Article 57 of the Penal Code: where both a general description and a specific description apply to an act, the specific description is adopted, and in this field Article 10 is a specific provision for fraud committed through electronic means. The second is in Article 30 of the Cybercrime Law: applying the penalties of this Law does not prevent imposing a more severe penalty provided for in another law.
This makes clear why it is not enough to say that the facts are "fraud"; the real question is which of the two provisions applies, and whether the facts include an aggravating circumstance under one of them that makes its penalty the more severe. The lawyer examines this from the details of the facts themselves: where the deception took place, by what means, when the money moved, and how many people were harmed.
A look at the penalty line is enough to understand what follows from this choice: the fine under Article 417 stops at 500 dinars, while the fine under Article 10 starts at 5,000 dinars. The elements of fraud in its traditional form and its applications under the Penal Code are set out in detail in the article on traditional fraud under Article 417 of the Penal Code.
4. Neighboring Provisions That May Enter an Online Fraud File
A digital fraud may not stop at Article 10 alone. A fraudster who creates a payment page imitating a bank's website, collects card details, or runs an impersonated account may commit acts that the Cybercrime Law criminalizes in separate provisions. The following table brings together the main provisions, with their penalties as stated in them:
| Form of the act | Provision | Prescribed penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Taking another person's property by a fraudulent method, a false name or impersonating a capacity through an electronic means | Article 10 | Imprisonment for not less than one year and a fine of 5,000 to 25,000 dinars; an attempt carries the same penalty |
| Creating an account, page or channel on social platforms and falsely attributing it to a natural or legal person | Article 5(a) | Imprisonment for not less than three months, or a fine of 1,500 to 15,000 dinars, or both |
| Designing a website, application or email account and falsely attributing it to a natural or legal person | Article 5(b) | Imprisonment for not less than six months and a fine of 9,000 to 15,000 dinars |
| Falsely attributing the account or website to an official body or a public employee | Article 5(c) | A penalty of not less than temporary labor, and a fine of 15,000 to 45,000 dinars |
| Obtaining, using or publishing electronic payment means data without authorization | Article 8(a) | Imprisonment from one year to three years and a fine of 2,500 to 10,000 dinars |
| Taking another person's property using that data | Article 8(c) | Imprisonment for three years and a fine of 10,000 to 20,000 dinars |
| The act being committed against money transfer systems, payment services or banking services | Article 9 | Temporary labor for not less than five years and a fine of 25,000 to 75,000 dinars |
| Possessing a device, program, password or access codes without authorization for the purpose of committing a cybercrime | Article 11 | Imprisonment for not less than three months, or a fine of 2,500 to 25,000 dinars, or both |
The table shows that the same facts may be read under more than one provision. A link that impersonates a bank, steals card details and then withdraws the balance may combine Articles 5, 8 and 10, and if it targets a banking system, Article 9 comes in with its penalty of temporary labor. Choosing the description on which the complaint is built is itself a legal point that merits consultation, because the difference between two descriptions may be the difference between imprisonment and temporary labor, and between a fine in the hundreds of dinars and one in the tens of thousands.
5. Possessing Fraud Tools Is a Crime in Its Own Right
The law does not wait for fraud to occur before it punishes. Article 11 punishes anyone who, without authorization, possesses a device, program, prepared electronic data, password or access codes, or provides, produces, distributes or promotes them, where this is for the purpose of committing any of the crimes under the Law. This means that finding lists of card details or phishing tools on the respondent's device may open a separate file, even if it is not proven that any money actually moved.
Possession alone, however, is not enough; the provision requires that it be "for the purpose" of committing a crime. Proving or disproving this purpose depends on all the circumstantial evidence in the file: the nature of what was found, how it reached the device, and who uses the device. These are matters whose weight the lawyer assesses within the evidence as a whole, not from possession alone.
6. Digital Evidence in Online Fraud Cases
Article 36 of the Cybercrime Law gives evidence extracted from devices, networks, information systems and service providers probative force before the courts, and treats the IP address as one of the means of proof. Article 35 requires the designation of specialized public prosecutors and judges at the courts of first instance and the Magistrates' Courts to hear these crimes.
But legal probative force does not by itself settle whether the evidence is sound. Among the points the lawyer scrutinizes: whether the transfer records are linked to the account attributed to the respondent, whether the IP address ties the act to that person or to a device or network used by someone else, and whether the conversations and screenshots have remained intact since they were extracted. In the victim's files, recovering the money sometimes depends on how quickly the receiving account is identified, since Article 31 provides, upon conviction, for the confiscation of the proceeds of the crime and the devices used in it. Where the money passed through other people's accounts before it was withdrawn, the lawyer examines whether the file may extend to money laundering under Jordanian law against whoever received it knowing its source.
Practical note: Paragraph (d) of Article 36 punishes with imprisonment for not less than three months anyone who conceals, tampers with or destroys digital evidence. So do not delete any conversation, transfer record or account, and do not contact the other party, before putting the facts before a lawyer; deletion may cost the victim their evidence, and may add a new charge to the respondent's file. What suits each party differs according to their position and the facts of their file, which becomes clear by reviewing the file or consulting a specialist lawyer.
7. The Position of the Victim and the Position of the Respondent
The lawyer's work in an online fraud file differs according to the party being represented. On the victim's side, the lawyer examines the most accurate description of the facts as between Article 10 and its neighboring provisions, assesses how far the accounts and transfers can be linked to a specific person, and builds the private-right claim (the victim's personal claim) alongside the public-right action (the State's right to prosecute). If several people were harmed by the same method, Article 28 comes in to double the penalty, which changes the scale of the whole file.
On the respondent's side, the lawyer looks at whether the elements of the crime as the provision defines them are present, at the dividing line between a commercial dispute and criminalized deception, at whether the account and transfers are correctly attributed to the client, at the soundness of the digital evidence, and at the description assigned to the client: is it the most accurate description, or one more severe than the facts. These questions differ from one case to another, and they are points the lawyer settles after reviewing the full file, because the first statement before the investigating authority may set the direction of the file before it reaches the court.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is online fraud an independent crime in Jordanian law?
Yes. Article 10 of Cybercrime Law No. 17 of 2023 criminalized it with a specific provision and a specific penalty, and punishing it is no longer confined to Article 417 of the Penal Code. Article 417 keeps its role for fraud not committed by electronic means, and in cases where it prescribes a more severe penalty.
What is the penalty for online fraud in Jordan?
Under Article 10, imprisonment for not less than one year and a fine of not less than 5,000 dinars and not more than 25,000 dinars, and an attempt is punished with the same penalty. The penalty is doubled under Article 28 where there are multiple victims, where the crime is repeated, or where a position is exploited. Other, more severe provisions may also apply to the facts, such as Article 9 if the act targeted banking systems, and the lawyer settles this after reading the file.
What is Article 417 of the Jordanian Penal Code?
It is the general provision on the crime of fraud. It punishes anyone who induces another to hand over property or an instrument and takes it fraudulently, with imprisonment from six months to three years and a fine of 200 to 500 dinars, with aggravation in cases the article specifies, and double the penalty where there are multiple victims.
Does Article 15 of the Cybercrime Law relate to fraud?
No. Article 15 of Law No. 17 of 2023 punishes publishing false news that targets national security and social peace, and defamation, slander and insult through electronic means. Online fraud is governed by Article 10.
What is the difference between online fraud and online blackmail?
Fraud rests on deceiving the victim into handing over their property through a will vitiated by mistake, whereas blackmail rests on frightening the victim with threats to make them pay or to do or refrain from doing something, and it is governed by a different provision, Article 18, with different penalties. The two may come together in a single set of facts, in which case the lawyer determines the most accurate description for each act.
Can money be recovered in online fraud cases?
Article 31 provides, upon conviction, for the confiscation of the proceeds of the crime, and the victim is entitled to claim their private right. The chances of actual recovery, however, depend on factors the victim cannot settle alone, such as identifying the account that received the money and where the offender is located, and assessing these factors is the lawyer's work after reviewing the details of the facts.
Legal Consultation
Online fraud cases are sensitive on both sides; the victim may watch their money move between accounts faster than it can be stopped, and the respondent may find themselves facing a penalty of not less than one year's imprisonment and a fine in the thousands, or facing temporary labor if the act is characterized under a more severe provision. Because the outcome of the file depends on the description on which it is built from the complaint or the first statement onward, and on the soundness of the digital evidence, a mistake at the start may be impossible to correct later. A lawyer providing defense and representation in online fraud cases begins by identifying the most accurate article for the facts, with an understanding of the related provisions in the table of crimes under the Cybercrime Law and of the difference between online fraud and online blackmail; you can contact Alabwini Law Firm & Legal Consultancy.
