HRW asks Saudi Arabia to stay executions
COLOMBO (AFP) – Human Rights Watch on Thursday asked Saudi Arabia to stay executions after it beheaded four Sri Lankans and ordered the public display of their bodies.
The New York-based rights group said in a statement sent here that the Saudi Arabian authorities had carried out the executions on Monday and subsequently ordered the bodies to be publicly displayed, flouting international law.
“The Saudi government should immediately halt all executions and retry those convicted in trials that do not meet minimum international standards of justice,†the group said.
The watchdog said it had spoken to one of the four Sri Lankans, Ranjith de Silva, on February 12 and at that time he was unaware of his imminent execution and was hopeful that he could still obtain clemency.
…The London-based Amnesty International has reported that Saudi Arabia has already executed 17 persons in 2007.
Executions are usually carried out in public in ultra-conservative Saudi Arabia, which applies a strict form of sharia, or Islamic law.
Rape, murder, apostasy, armed robbery and drug trafficking can all carry the death penalty.
“Officials in the Saudi justice system failed to ensure that these four Sri Lankans had the basic safeguards required for anyone at risk of the death penalty,†the rights group charged.
This piece from Agence France Press runs in Khaleej Times. I am against the death penalty except in the most extreme cases, so I’m not happy with these executions. But the Saudi government believes that the public execution of particular classes of criminals shows the Saudi populace that justice is being done and that it has a positive effect in reducing crime. That only one of these offenses is considered a capital crime in most countries with a death penalty—murder—makes the Saudis’ case harder for them to sell, especially since one of the ‘crimes’, apostasy’, is not viewed as a crime at all in most of the world.
The Los Angeles Times runs a bizarre piece on this story: Saudi Court Orders Bodies Strung Up. The Associated Press piece is pretty objective reporting, but the headline isn’t supported by the substance of the article. The story says it’s not clear whether the bodies were displayed; the headline expresses outrage that it was done. That moves the story into the column of ‘Saudi-bashing’. [Note: The LA Times is not responsible for this headline. It is running on the AP feed being picked up by media around the world. That does not, however, change the fact that it is unsupported by the story.]
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
February:22:2007 - 13:15
The idea of “stringing up” headless bodies is frankly rather absurd, while not completely impossible.
February:22:2007 - 13:33
Well, Mussolini, while not decapitated, was hung by his heels in WWII Italy.
February:23:2007 - 10:21
Although the apparent brutality of the beheadings may seem repulsive to some it is important to not impose western standards of what is “culturally palatable.”
The much more important issue is that the courts lack due process, transparency in the legal system and representation. In addition third world embassies are often powerless in protecting their citizens. Forced confessions have been documented, torture has been well noted, and incidents of prisoners “disappearing” in jail only to be proven as executed without conviction years later in letters and accounts from fellow prisoners who were released have been published.
Another issue is the equality of application. A royal youth who was caught assaulting and breaking many bones in his victim receives a much lighter sentence than an expat caught selling his exam to students (a year in prison). Equality in the application of punishment is an area where there could be improvement.
As one Saudi put it, “these expats are treated like dogs.”
[NOTE: I've moved this comment to the proper message.]
February:27:2007 - 23:23
“…it is important to not impose western standards of what is ‘culturally palatable.’”
Why is that?
Every valid issue you cite subsequently can be deflected with that caveat.
Should I be chastened by my Elitist Western Cultural Impositions on the world? More to the point, should I be ashamed of Human Rights Watch’s Elitist Western Cultural Impositions on the world?
I am not.
Nevertheless, you would have me trivialize the very culture in which I was raised in that instilled in me the sense that killing someone for their religious beliefs is reprehensible.
Clapton, you disgust me. You should be ashamed of yourself. Are you even fathoming the implications that atrocity is a legally relative condition?
And you, Burgess, are you even aware of the backhanded spin you present for Saudi jurisprudence when you declare that apostasy is “not viewed as a crime [elsewhere]“?
“Not Viewed As”? It’s not a crime. Period.
Is your immediate reflex to lay the foundation to excuse the practice by declaring technically that particular thoughtcrime is a legally defined capital offense in Saudi Arabia? If so, find a soul somewhere. Quickly.
Death sentences for apostasy are just not “culturally palatable,” it’s wrong on every level.
Despite the sidebar disclaimer, this site is an apologia for the country of Saudi Arabia. Is this the best you all can do? Shrug your shoulders with a sheepish grin and aw-shucks your way by saying you’re not a fan of the system, but golly, I know some nice Saudis?
If you want to call it “Saudi-bashing”, go ahead. However, what we need to do is start bashing all the Americans and other “Westerners” who connive to these shameful alliances by concluding with an expert’s resignation that nothing can be quickly expected with a conservative society and that we must respect their norms.
That is a dangerous precedent of political fatalism. By that very same rationale, we Americans can say to the world: “About that whole Gitmo Thing? It’s the normality. The suspension of Haebas Corpus in International Law? Cultural Thing. By the way, you are incorrect to be so judgmental. Piss off, Amnesty International, it’s important not to impose standards.”
Shall we present this particular tack of rhetoric to the members of the OIC?
How do you suppose that would work out?
As a cultural experiment, Clap, try presenting that in the Arabic language the next time you’re outside compound walls in KSA.
Dare you.
But you wouldn’t. You’re the type of person who opines on a Saudi Royal getting less of a sentence for a crippling assault than an expat who sells school exams that “there could be improvement.”
Gee. You think? There “could be”?
Are you super-duper sure?
You’re sure you’re not just letting your Western Standards color your worldview in a prejudicial way?
You are an ideological coward at best, Clapton. As is everyone who dismisses the freedoms of speech, religion, the press, and assembly as a selective cultural standard. This doesn’t have to be A Western Thing, as you condescendingly imply. We all can do it by rejecting association with the regimes that will both ban the Muslim Brotherhood and jail bloggers who challenge Islamism. Or countries that impose imprisonment for the circulation of iconic images of Tian An Men Square. Or, big obvious warning sign, systems that consider it acceptable to prosecute capital cases for blasphemy in opaque judicail settings.
We need ration cards here in America again. If we dare to even take the pretense that our troops sacrifice for freedom, then we as civilians must likewise sacrifice our convenience of resources by having nothing to do, diplomatically or commercially, with political systems that do not have a reciprocal level of rights for their citizens.
And we need to have nothing to do with people like you.
Am I being too harsh? Let me check what you wrote again. Let’s see: Public beheadings after a sham trial for a crime not involving the death of another “…may SEEM repulsive to some…”
Nope. I am not harsh enough. Go to Hell.
February:28:2007 - 09:44
Sorry you don’t like the viewpoint of this site. Sorrier that you’ve missed what that viewpoint actually is.
I do not favor the death penalty except in the most egregious cases (that imposed upon Saddam Hussein meets my strict criteria). But my opinion doesn’t particularly count, you know? It doesn’t count in the 23 American states who permit it; it counts even less in Saudi Arabia. So it’s not that I’m being ‘culturally relativistic’. It’s that I can state my opinion but have to realize that it will have no impact whatsoever.
When I state that ‘apostasy is not viewed as a crime [elsewhere]‘, I am not writing for an American audience which knows that. I am writing for my Arab and Muslim readers (about 1/3 of my total), informing them of the fact that their particular view on the matter is a minority one. I don’t have to get in their faces to make that point. I have a volume control in the way I express my opinions and am not restricted to a ‘full volume’ or ‘off’ choice.
I have problems with any system or cultural ethic that abrogates for itself a power it claims belongs only to its deity, that of reading the soul of others. Religion, in my book, is a matter of personal conscience, not something that is open to coercion or limited interpretation imposed by others.
But I also recognize the fact that my view is not shared by the majority of Saudis nor an unknown number of other Muslims. Does my shouting about it change it? I don’t think so.
Perhaps you could read through the archives of this site and get a better idea of what the blog–and I–are actually about.
February:28:2007 - 11:07
[...] Crossroads Arabia have also been very busy recently. In one week, they updated on the recent Valentine’s-day-related punishments, Adel Al-Jubeir’s formal assignment as Saudi ambassador to the US, HR groups protesting Saudi beheadings, cyber activism by Saudi women, and both forced divorce cases of Fatima and ex-husband Mansour, and Rania and ex-husband Saud. Regarding the most-recent death of celebrity Anna Nicole Smith, Yazeed seems to have had it with the obsessive media coverage of the case. He is disappointed with CNN’s Larry King and said: “Every night, every single night (I like to have CNN on when I sleep) that’s all he talks about, he has the same guests (almost), talking about the wacky case.” He also said that he is changing his “sleep channel” to Fox News. This whole craze has certainly turned some heads. Aya thinks that the media regards Anna Nicole’s death more important than Iraq. Speaking of Iraq, Ubergirl87 raised some very interesting questions, in a recent post, regarding the wartorn country. [...]
February:28:2007 - 16:56
Troy, allow me to respond to a point or two.
The “culturally palatable” referred to the manner of execution. Whether it’s lethal injection, hanging, or the gas chamber, the result is the same. If your judicial philosophy is punishment then whether something deserves the death penalty would come from your code of ethics. Rape, murder, armed robbery each have their own arguments for death. However, drug smuggling and apostasy may seem especially unfair.
As one of the Al-Sheiks explained it to me, in the Sharia system there are two classes of crimes, ones against a person, and those against society. Many here believe that if a person turns against Islam that will affect the faith of those around him thus undermining the most sacred underpinning of society here. As for drug smuggling, its more obvious to see how that affects society. That may help to explain why apostasy and drug smuggling get the death penalty.
It’s not against the law to believe something different, but to convert from Islam to something else. In the Wahabbi school the non-believers get taxed. When I asked my friend about this he seemed a little embarrassed and said it was only about 5% of total assets every year, but I have a feeling it would be more.
As for the armed theft, I’m not sure why those guys got the death penalty, my understanding is that if something stolen is damaged the penalty is amputation of the right hand, the “clean” hand. Maybe someone with a good knowledge of Sharia jurisprudence could say something on that.
If your judicial philosophy is focused on the rehab of the criminal then beheading would inhibit the rehab plan. I’m sure HRW understands that.
When judging the average Saudi it must be understood that this has been a closed society for years. Just 30 years ago it hardly had roads. Until the internet and satellite tv (a development in the last 7 years or so) there were no alternative points of view to weigh against one’s own very prescriptive culture. Some Saudis tonight were telling me that just 7-8 years ago the religious police drove around shooting satellite dishes with shotguns.
The tribal mindset is still far more powerful than an individualist. I think that may be because it is only recently that people could turn from a harsh Bedouin life focused on survival to enjoy the luxury of examining their own belief systems.
Is this an excuse for what many from the west see as obvious crimes against humanity? No, but when you want to engage with a society its good to try to understand where they are coming from.
I think we can see the fruits of engagement already. When HRW came in I believe that was a breakthrough. Even if it was a purely cosmetic pr act, it validated the body and the criticism that the country has recieved. SA decided to show that world that the criticisms were untrue. Why do that if they believed there wasn’t a problem and they didn’t care what others thought.
I think a loosening of the press, the net and sat tv are having a huge effect that may not be seen until the next generation takes power. But it is there.
Troy, when people ask, I tell them that if I had wanted to live on a compound I would have moved to a comfy little town in the heartland. Please ask, don’t assume.
When it comes to the death penalty, I know French culture has changed a bit but it wasn’t all that long ago that beheading was quite the rage. You’d be surprised how many people here know the “let them cake” story.
I hope that clears up a few things.
Thanks John for all your efforts. I for one sincerely appreciate the exchange, links and insight from many.