US-based Human Rights Watch issued a statement applauding Saudi Arabia for instituting a public defender program for its courts. The organization—which some allege is too friendly toward countries that write checks to support it—is not entirely complimentary in its statement, noting that the Saudi justice system needs to do much more.
A law, however, is only as good or as strong as it is applied. Already, there are laws that permit a defendant to have the aid of legal council in court, but judges have not supported that in all instances. Often, Saudi media report, attorneys have been prevented from taking part in a trial. Educating judges of the defendant’s right will be necessary; punishing judges who don’t follow the law will be necessary as well.
Saudi Arabia: Criminal Justice Strengthened
(New York) – Saudi Arabia’s appointed Shura Council has approved establishing a public defender program, a step that will strengthen the criminal justice system, Human Rights Watch said today. The program approved by the council on January 11, 2010 will appoint a lawyer at the state’s expense to any criminal defendant who cannot afford one.
“Providing access to defense lawyers who will be present at criminal trials has the potential to transform Saudi criminal trials from matters of personal judicial opinion into questions of law and fact,” said Christoph Wilcke, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa division. “Providing free legal services to indigent defendants is a milestone for the Saudi justice system.”
Violations of defendants’ rights are systemic in Saudi Arabia, including arrests without warrants; ill-treatment during interrogation; prolonged incommunicado detention; no-notice trial sessions and verdicts; long delays in trials; and obstacles to challenging the evidence against a defendant.
…
Sheikh Al-Obaikan comes out, in this Saudi Gazette/Okaz piece, in support of the creation of a law setting the minimum age for women to marry at 18. He offers a plan for exceptions to the law, ‘granted only by judges or on royal approval’. That strikes me as perhaps too big a loophole. Given past examples where judges happily signed marriage contracts for 6- and 7-year-old girls, this loophole would do nothing to change the status quo. The history of the behavior of at least some judges does not support confidence in their following the intent of a law, beyond how craftily they can offer judgments that seem to be in compliance with the letter of the law but entirely miss its purpose.
Once the qualifications of judges, as well as their suitability to their positions, becomes elevated enough to ensure their compliance with the law, then perhaps. Right now, though? I’d rather that loophole be closed.
Obaikan seeks ban on under-18 marriage
Abdullah Al-DaniJEDDAH – Adviser to the Royal Court Abdul Mohsen Al-Obaikan has said that the marriage of girls under the age of 18 should be banned by law, with exceptions to be granted only by judges or on royal approval.
Al-Obaikan described the marriage of minors as a “grave error” and asked parents and legal guardians to “fear Allah and not marry their daughters by force to persons they don’t want to.”
…
In the comments to the article at the paper’s website, we find one which supports the loophole as it would have helped her, she believes.
Here’s a story, from Arab News, that points to the problem of the Saudi propensity to keep embarrassing information out of public sight. Six African ‘over-stayers’—meaning they had stayed in the country past the expiration date of their visas—are found dead along highways in the Kingdom. They are suspected of jumping off the buses transporting them to deportation facilities. But the opacity of the reports leaves the story open for even worse interpretation. This, as are many, many other cases, is a clear indication of why transparency is necessary for government conduct to be understood.
Overstayers die on way to deportation
Muhammad Al-Sulami | Arab NewsJEDDAH: The deaths of six African overstayers whose bodies were found in various locations between Jeddah and Al-Leeth, a town to the south of Jeddah, has shocked the authorities.
According to the police, the Passport Department was transporting 200 illegal overstayers from Jazan to Jeddah for deportation.
Apparently, six of them jumped from the moving buses during the journey to Jeddah. Highway police found their bodies at various places between Al-Leeth and Jeddah.
The Passport Department did not report the six Africans missing, which goes against official procedures when overstayers are delivered to the deportation center.
…
In its online, ‘On Faith’ column, The Washington Post offers a broader exploration of the thinking behind the proposal to ban the wearing of face veils in France. The article cites several issues involving fundamentalist interpretations of Islam that fly in the face of French values and which need to be addressed, according to various French officials. The article is balanced and worth reading.
French leaders push for ban of Muslim dress in public places
Edward CodyLYON, FRANCE — France, which regards itself as the cradle of human rights, is moving to impose legal restrictions on Muslim women who wear Afghan-style burqas or other full-face veils.
The restrictions, likely to apply to many public places, come in response to resentment in France and other European countries over the growing visibility of Muslims — immigrants or locally born — on a continent with ancient Christian roots. The tensions have long run through European societies but increasingly are coming to the surface as the number of Muslims grows and symbols of their faith, including mosques, are seen as a challenge to European traditions.
Andre Gerin, a member of Parliament who recently completed six months of hearings on the burqa controversy, said that he has nothing against the more than 5 million Muslims in France but that full-face veils are the visible tip of an Islamist underground that threatens the French way of life.
Although veiled women are estimated to number no more than several thousand in this country of 64 million, Gerin said, behind them are what he called “gurus” who are trying to impose Islamic law on French society.
For instance, Gerin said, doctors at the Mother and Child Hospital in Lyon told him during a visit Thursday that they are threatened several times a week by angry Muslim men who refuse to allow their pregnant wives or daughters to be treated by male doctors, even for emergency births when nobody else is available. “The scope of the problem is a lot broader than I thought,” he said at a news conference here summing up his findings. “It is insidious.”
…
And just for collateral counterpoint, the Post offers a review of a book on Coco Chanel, who said she “gave the female body its freedom back — a body that had for so long been suffocating beneath layers of showy costumes, frills, corsets, under-things, and padding.” I don’t think she had abayas around to complain about…
‘And a little more substance’ seems to be the message coming from the Ministry of Justice as it announces plans to change the curricula at Shariah Law colleges. Saudi Gazette/Okaz report that the Higher Judiciary Institute wants subject-matter expertise taught at the schools, not just what was done in the past. As the article notes, law is applied today. How it was applied hundreds, if not a thousand years ago may have little or nothing to do with the realities of the 21st Century. This is a major shift in thinking about law, part of the top-to-bottom legal reforms the Kingdom is undertaking. It is sure to upset conservatives who still tend to think that if it was good enough for the earliest figures in Islam, it ought to be good enough today. Those critics seem totally immune to the irony of their posting their criticisms on websites or broadcasting them through satellite TV.
Shariah colleges to ‘match the market’
Ahmad MaidiNAJRAN – Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Sattam Bin Abdul Aziz, a member of the Higher Judiciary Institute and the Consultation Committee at the Shariah College in Najran, has said that jurisprudential concepts will develop to match the changing world and that the next 15 years will see Shariah colleges graduates move on to purely scientific post-graduate studies such as e-commerce, insurance, marketing and management.
Prince Abdul Aziz said that changes in the market inevitably lead to “development in jurisprudential concepts to produce new rules and expand in to their own fields of specialty which are introduced into the curricula.”
“This is a continuous cycle and a natural process of development,” the Prince said.
“The need for specialist consultations in these areas is governed by the development of the curricula which should be designed in a way to meet these requirements so that qualified graduates can fill the posts,” Prince Abdul Aziz said.
… “Jurisprudence is only applied in the present age, as a scholar will inevitably gives his ruling on something that is happening now and not in the past, even if he bases his ruling on precedents from history,” the Prince said.
“Jurisprudence is by definition contemporary, which means that it can’t be applied in the past and is therefore inevitably applied now.”
First came the torrential floods in November. Now, it’s sandstorms reducing visibility on the streets to zero. It seems that Jeddah is a difficult place to live, no matter the cause…
Sandstorm hits Jeddah
Rami Al-Sulimani and Ibrahim AlawiJEDDAH – A massive sandstorm hit Jeddah Wednesday like a tidal wave, turning everything into an eerie orange brown color.
There was zero visibility plunged as the huge mass of sand ploughed through this coastal city, causing traffic jams on most of streets including the Al-Mina Bridge, a main artery for traffic in south Jeddah. Most of the districts in Jeddah were enveloped with dust causing panic among residents who feared a repeat of the flood disaster which hit the city last year, causing widespread damage and loss of life.
Hussein Al-Qahtani, the spokesman for the Meteorology and Environmental Protection Presidency attributed the sandstorm to active surface wind which kicked up dust in the northern parts of the Kingdom, including Hail, Qassim and western parts of the Kingdom – especially areas located between Makkah and Madina.
…
It’s not just Muslims who are feeling put upon for their religion. Below is a piece from The Washington Post‘s ‘On Faith’ web page. The comments to the piece are where the real debate is going on, so focus your attention there.
There are numerous Christian commentators in the US who believe that Christianity—which they see, rightly or wrongly—as fundamental to American values, is deprecated in the US public space. They bitterly argue about the ‘War against Christmas’, wherein commercial and political establishments refrain from using the word ‘Christmas’, instead using an anodyne and religion-free ‘Holidays’. The see the media taking cheap shots at Christians and Christian values while either staying away from joking about or criticizing Judaism or other religions, and avoiding criticizing Islam for the sake of avoiding violent reaction.
Media biased against Christians?
Fox News analyst Brit Hume said “widespread media bias against Christianity” was to blame for criticism of his suggestion that Tiger Woods should embrace Christianity to find redemption. “Instead of urging that Tiger Woods turn to Christianity, if I had said what he needed to do was to strengthen his Buddhist commitment or turn to Hinduism, I don’t think anybody would have said a word,” Hume told Christianity Today. “It’s Christ and Christianity that get people stirred up.”
Sarah Palin and other conservative Christians have made similar claims. Is there widespread media bias against Christianity? Against evangelicals such as Hume and Palin? Against public figures who speak openly and directly about their faith? Against people who believe as you do?
…
Whether or not it’s a wise move, France is considering banning face-covering from all public places. Arab News carries this Reuters report which states that a parliamentary commission is advising just that. I can certainly see some instances where other issues take precedence over religious obligation (whether actually part of the religion or only believed to be part of the religion). Passport photos, drivers licenses, testifying in court have all been found in the US to be situations in which a woman’s desire to cover her face will fail in confrontation with law.
Personally, I don’t see that it would be necessary for veils to be banned in all public places, but I’m not French. There, they (or at least the parliamentary commission) see the veil as inimical of French values as well as a security risk. Some will see the move as prudent and protective. Others will see it as an assault on Islam and Islamic values. Yet others may see it as a state intrusion on what should be, at heart, a private matter. Let the games begin…
French proposal for burqa ban rouses heated debate
Sophie Hardach | ReutersPARIS: A French parliamentary commission’s proposal to ban full Islamic veils such as the burqa and the niqab from public places has roused heated debate, and efforts to hammer out a compromise are gathering speed.
The head of the commission said on Wednesday the next step should be a law imposing the ban, but many lawmakers and activists have voiced skepticism at the prospect of police forcing women to lift their veils.
“We will talk about the idea of a law, about the need to take time to prepare it and to avoid stigmatization,” commission head and communist lawmaker Andre Gerin told French radio. The commission is expected to publish its findings on Jan. 26 or 27.
…
While the commenters at the Saudi Gazette website aren’t crazy about the idea—too little, in their opinion—I think the proposal to permit foreign women to drive before Saudi women has something going for it. At the very least, it would serve as a wedge issue, one that got Saudi women jumping up and down about how they are just as good drivers as foreign women. That would rather quickly force open the door to Saudi women’s driving, though it’d be a back door.
Mit’eb: Let foreign women drive first
Abdullah Abayan and Wafa BadawoudJEDDAH – Prince Mit’eb Bin Abdullah Bin Abdul Aziz, Deputy Commander of the National Guard for Executive Affairs, has suggested that allowing females to drive in the Kingdom could be tried out by bringing in foreign women and letting them get behind the wheel on the Kingdom’s roads first.
Speaking at a weekly gathering in Jeddah of several dozen invited male and female figures hosted by well-known businessman Abdul Maqsoud Khoja, Prince Mit’eb spoke Tuesday on a range of issues and answered enquiries from the audience.
In response to a query concerning women driving, the son of King Abdullah said “it all depends on the acceptance or refusal of society at large.”
“Women driving is something which requires steps to pave the way for it. Perhaps we could first permit the recruitment of women drivers from abroad and then assess the positive and negatives,” the Prince said. “People’s current views have to change, and they have to regard women in a different light so that women don’t face further problems,” he said.
…
I’m posting on this Saudi Gazette/Okaz article because it is reporting something I’ve not seen before: the 100% allocation by a Saudi court of responsibility for an accident. Usually in Saudi courts, responsibility for accidents is apportioned out to the various parties under the assumption that, at the very least, had they not be at a particular place at a particular time, the accident would not have occurred. Here, though, a contractor responsible for road repairs left dangerous conditions of their work-in-progress unmarked, leading to 14 accidents which included two fatalities.
In US courts, the company would have been found guilty of gross negligence and, likely, manslaughter in one degree or other. The company would also have faced civil suits to recoup the costs of the accidents to those harmed. The Saudi court’s judgment, allowing for differences in law, of course, seems to be approaching this way of looking at accidents, perhaps as a measure of the on-going legal reform.
Company ordered to pay blood money
Abdullah Al-MaqatiDHULUM – The General Court in Riyadh has ordered a road works company to pay out SR240,000 in blood money for the deaths of two persons in a traffic accident that occurred in Ramadan.
The company was also told to pay for the medical costs of a third person injured in the incident.
The court blamed the contracted firm for delays in completing works at a junction near Al-Hufeira on the Taif to Riyadh road, and for failing to place warning signs and introduce other safety measures at the site.
…
Saudi Gazette/Okaz does a major correction piece on the new virus which is currently the focus of medical investigations in Saudi Arabia. First, it’s “Al-Khurma”, not ‘Al-Khumra’; second, it’s transmitted by mites, not mosquitoes or ticks, as earlier media reports had it. The mites, according to this article, are carried by livestock, rabbits, and cats… no mention of dogs.
It matters to get things correctly. The article goes on to say that the disease, though not yet widespread, is more dangerous than Rift Valley Fever. Earlier reports noted a mortality rate of 25%, a figure not challenged here.
It’s Al-Khurma, not Al-Khumra, says official
JEDDAH – The head of Jeddah Health Affairs has said that the correct name for the potentially fatal virus that was reported nine days ago as having hospitalized four persons in the city is “Al-Khurma”, and not “Al-Khumra” as reported in the local media.
Sami Badawood also said the Al-Khurma virus made its first appearance with six cases in Jeddah in 1994 and was named at the time after the source, identified as “goats from the Taif region of Al-Khurma”, thereby refuting claims from other quarters that it was derived from the Al-Khumra District of Jeddah where some cases had been detected.
According to Al-Watan Arabic daily on Tuesday, Badawood also refuted suggestions that the illness was passed on by mosquitoes.
“The Al-Khurma virus is passed on to humans by mites that live in animal pens for sheep, goats and camels, and pets such as cats and rabbits can also carry the mites that have the disease,” Badawood was reported as saying at a press conference on Monday. “There is no scientific evidence that the illness is passed on through mosquitoes.”
…
It’s an idea that’s been kicked around before, but it’s still on the playing field… what is the minimum age at which Saudi women can/should be legally married? Saudi Gazette/Okaz report that the Saudi Ministry of Justice is again considering the age of 18. That strikes me as reasonable; I wouldn’t object if it were even set at 16 or 17, or 19 or 20 for that matter. But some sort of line has to be drawn to avoid the atrocities of 7- and 8-year-old girls’ being married off by money-minded fathers.
Minimum marriage age for girls at 18?
Fatima Aal AmrJEDDAH – The Ministry of Justice is considering a proposal to set the minimum marriage age for girls at 18, rather than 15 years of age, a source said Monday.
This comes in the wake of an outcry from certain human rights organizations, and women’s groups in the country and abroad calling for the Kingdom to set a minimum age for the marriage of females.An informed source said that several committees at the ministry is studying these proposals.
…