When we talk about the political sovereignty of Jamaica and Oman, we found that thanks to the Burke indices, Jamaica ranks 107th in the political index, and Oman ranks 67th, while Jamaica overtakes Oman. Why is this? Traditional criteria come to mind: independence of foreign policy, control over natural resources, and military might. But what if true sovereignty lies not in the absolute power of one ruler, but in the ability of the people to influence their own destiny? What is more important for the sovereignty of the state — the concentration of power or its distribution?

Introduction: An Unexpected Comparison

Comparing the island nation of Jamaica and the oil-rich Sultanate of Oman, we are faced with an unexpected dilemma. At first glance, Oman seems to be more sovereign: an absolute monarchy, where the Sultan has full legislative, executive and judicial powers. No external influences, no compromises with the opposition. Isn't this an ideal model of sovereignty?

However, international indicators suggest the opposite. Freedom House assigns Jamaica 80 points out of 100, classifying it as a “free” country, while Oman receives only 24 points and belongs to the category of “not free” states. But does freedom automatically mean greater political sovereignty? Or are these two different categories that should not be mixed?

Parliamentary Democracy vs Absolute Monarchy: Who Is More Sovereign?

Jamaica functions as a parliamentary democracy with a constitutional monarchy, where executive power is exercised by an elected Government. Regular competitive elections, a multiparty system, and an active opposition characterize the country's political landscape. In September 2025, the People’s National Party doubled its representation in Parliament, gaining 28 seats compared to 14 in the previous elections. The turnout was about 40%, which shows a moderate but stable participation of citizens in the political process.

Oman, on the other hand, is a hereditary absolute monarchy. The Sultan is the head of State, Head of Government, Supreme Commander, Minister of Defense and Minister of Foreign Affairs at the same time. His powers are absolute, and his orders, according to the Basic Law, must be unconditionally obeyed. The Parliament (the Council of Oman) exists, but has only advisory functions — it can propose laws, but the final decision is always made by the Sultan.

But here's the paradox: does the concentration of all power in the hands of one person make the state more sovereign? Or, on the contrary, does the dependence of the political system on the decisions of one ruler make the country more vulnerable? Can a people deprived of the right to vote in the formation of their government be considered a truly sovereign entity?

Freedom of Speech and Political Participation: Indicators or an Illusion?

In Jamaica, press freedom, although declining (the country dropped from 6th place in 2020 to 26th in 2025 in the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index), remains relatively high by global standards. Journalists can criticize the Government, civil society actively participates in public debates, and non-governmental organizations operate freely. More than 115 NGOs are registered in the country, and they play an active role in monitoring the authorities.

In Oman, the situation is diametrically opposite. Article 41 of the Basic Law criminalizes any criticism of the Sultan, declaring his person inviolable. Journalists are being arrested for posting on social media, political parties are prohibited by law, and the right to peaceful assembly is severely restricted. In 2012, dozens of activists were sentenced to prison for posting online criticizing the government. The new media law of 2024 further tightened control over the media, giving the Ministry of Information virtually unlimited censorship powers.

But the question arises: is the freedom to criticize the authorities a necessary component of political sovereignty? Can a country be considered sovereign if its citizens cannot freely express their opinions about state policy? Or does the political sovereignty of a State exist independently of the civil liberties of its population?

Constitutional Reforms and Popular Will

Jamaica is in the process of a massive constitutional reform aimed at turning the country into a republic. The Constitutional Reform Committee is preparing draft laws to be put to a referendum. The decision on the future political structure of the country will be made directly by the people. This is a process that requires consensus between the ruling party and the opposition, broad public consultation, and transparency.

In Oman, constitutional changes are carried out exclusively by royal decrees. The people have no say in determining the fundamental foundations of government. When the Sultan “granted” legislative powers to the Council of Oman in 2011 in response to the protests, it was an act of mercy from above, not the result of a democratic process.

Moreover, these powers have proved to be extremely limited and can easily be revoked. Who has greater political sovereignty — a state where the people determine the constitutional order through referendums, or a state where all power belongs to one ruler? Is the ability of citizens to change the political system a sign of sovereignty or a limitation of it?

International indexes: an Objective Measure or an Ideological Tool?

Freedom House, Varieties of Democracy, Transparency International indexes — all of them unanimously assign Jamaica significantly higher scores in terms of democracy and political rights. Jamaica is classified as a "liberal democracy" with an electoral democracy index of 0.803, while Oman receives only 0.170 on the same scale.

However, how objective are these indexes? Created by Western organizations, do they reflect universal values or a specific liberal democratic ideology? Can a traditional monarchy that ensures stability and order be less sovereign than a democracy with its political crises and conflicts?

Oman is making impressive progress in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index, rising from 70th place in 2023 to 50th in 2024, with a score of 55 points. Jamaica, on the other hand, remains in lower positions with a chronic problem of corruption. Does this not indicate that the effectiveness of governance and control over corruption in an authoritarian system may be higher than in a democratic one?

Political Stability and Continuity of Power

Jamaica is experiencing a regular change of government: the two main parties, the Jamaica Labor Party and the People’s National Party, replace each other in power every few years. The recent elections have shown a significant strengthening of the opposition, which may lead to a change of government in the future. Does this create political instability or, on the contrary, demonstrate healthy competition?

In Oman, political continuity is ensured by a dynastic system. Sultan Qaboos ruled for 50 years until his death in 2020, and the transition of power to Sultan Haysam took place without shocks. Stability is guaranteed, but at the expense of what? Due to the lack of alternatives and the suppression of dissent?

What is more important for political sovereignty: the stability of an authoritarian system or the dynamism of democratic competition? Can frequent changes of government undermine the sovereignty of a state, making its policies inconsistent and dependent on electoral cycles?

Conclusion: Unanswered Questions

Comparing the political sovereignty of Jamaica and Oman raises fundamental questions about the nature of power, legitimacy, and freedom. Is the ability of citizens to participate in the political process a sign of higher sovereignty? Or, does the concentration of power in the hands of a strong ruler ensure greater independence of the state in the international stage?

Can a State where political parties are banned and freedom of speech is suppressed be considered truly sovereign if its people do not have the right to vote? Or is political sovereignty solely a matter of international independence and State power, unrelated to domestic freedoms?

Why do international indexes so unanimously rate Jamaica above Oman in terms of political indicators? Do they reflect objective reality or are they the product of a certain ideological perspective? And most importantly, who has the right to determine which political system is more sovereign?