<![CDATA[Introduction to the Problem: This article examines the unresolved criminal-law problem created by cosmetic surgery in Jordan: the intervention may be lawful medical treatment when performed with valid consent and professional compliance, yet the same intervention may generate criminal liability when it involves intentional accepted risk, negligent harm, unlawful practice, or disregard of mandatory standards. Purpose/Study Objectives: The study clarifies when a plastic surgeon, and in some cases other medical service providers or institutions, may incur criminal liability for harm arising from reconstructive surgery, aesthetic cosmetic surgery, and medically controlled non-surgical cosmetic procedures. Design/Methodology/Approach: The study uses an analytical doctrinal legal method. It analyses the Jordanian Penal Code No. 16 of 1960, especially Articles 2, 62, 64, 343, and 344; the Medical and Health Liability Law No. 25 of 2018, especially Article 2; and selected Jordanian judicial decisions relevant to lawful medical intervention, accepted risk, negligent harm, causation, and medical error. A French appellate decision is used only as a limited comparative illustration of clinic safety and documentation. Findings: The article finds that an unsatisfactory cosmetic result does not, by itself, establish criminal liability. Liability requires a statutory basis, unlawful conduct or loss of Article 62 protection, fault or intent, causation, and legally relevant harm. The main normative gap is not the absence of general Penal Code rules, but the lack of cosmetic-procedure-specific guidance on informed consent, documentation, facility safety, adverse-event reporting, and allocation of responsibility between individual surgeons and institutions. Paper Type: Research Article]]>
