principle of acquiring knowledge of laws. Thus the Law is flawed, namely; Article (3), because of broadness of the criminal element of the offences stipulated in the Law and the possibility of adapting the legal text to suite personal trends and whims. Also it is criticized for the dual of criminality, because the Jordanian Penal Code in the First Section prescribed this offense within the crimes which affect the foreign national security, namely in article (118/2). As a result, the legislator’s expansion of the connotations of this crime and making them unrestrained without stating its descriptions or implications whatever; may entails the possibility of considering any act to be as an act of terrorism. This unfettered expansion is deemed regrettable, especially that the terrorism crime is considered as one of grave crimes, which the legislator would not require the achievement of the criminal result to convict persons charged under this Law, which would entail expanding the scope if criminalization, and compromising the requirements of fair trials, which involves not punishing any person for a crime he did not commit. In terms of the procedural rules, the Law contains a departure from the general principles of the procedural norms; since the Public Prosecutor has the right, in case of a well - founded information that a person being related to a terrorist activity, to impose censorship on the communication of that person and prevent him from traveling. However, he should not take such measures that infringe on the individuals' rights to privacy life and their right to freedom of movement, provided that there are genuine evidences and clues that indicate the commission of terrorist acts, or that was reasonably imminent. Accordingly the vague text providing that "the existence of well-founded information", should not only be used. Right to life, prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and the right to an effective remedy (arts. 2 and 6-7) A- The legal problematic areas in the field of criminalization: Despite that a draft bill amending the Jordanian Penal Code no (16) of 1960 and its amendments, had been completed and published in 5/5/2016, article (208 that criminalizes torture, but in a piecemeal way, since it limits the definition of torture to extracting confession or acquiring information, was not included under that amendment, despite the frequent NCHR recommendations enshrined in its previous reports, which underscores the need to amend the said article to ensure that it is compatible with the international conventions. B- The legal problematic areas in the field of the criminal prosecution of torture complaints: The enhancement of the principle of effective prosecution of the torture crime requires the prosecution of defendants and conducting independent and effective investigations on torture complaints. All investigations undertaken by the law-enforcement entities, however, are criticized for the lack of independence, which is required by the international standards. Attribution of the subject matter jurisdiction (competence ratione materiae) to investigate and prosecute torture cases to special courts (namely, the Police Court), may results in the failure to effectively prosecute perpetrators of crimes of torture. This entails the continuing pattern of the seldom prosecution of those who commit torture are under article 208 of the Penal Code. The way how the law-enforcement authorities, including the Police Justice, handle the 12