Since September 11th,
2001, governments around the world have taken steps to reduce the threat of
terrorism and, as we found out through the revelations of Edward Snowden, many
of these actions include reductions to our privacy. While we generally
concern ourselves with how Western nations have responded to the possibility of terrorism, we
tend to forget that one nation has passed so-called anti-terrorism laws that
are extremely repressive. This is particularly pertinent given the recent blogger, Raif Badawi, who was sentenced to receive 1000 lashes, fifty at a time, once a week along with ten years in jail and a $275,000 fine as shown on this video:
Back in early 2014, Saudi
Arabia passed its newly minted Penal
Law for Crimes of Terrorism and its Financing. According to
Human Rights Watch, this law is flawed with age provisions that allow
authorities to criminalize free expression as well as granting police forces
powers that have no oversight from the judicial side of the Saudi justice
system.
Here is the Saudi definition
of a "terrorist crime":
"An act committed by an offender in furtherance of a
criminal enterprise, whether individually or collectively, directly or
indirectly, which is intended to disturb public order, or undermine the
security of society and the stability of the state or which endangers national
unity, the Constitution (Basic Law) or any part thereof, or which defames the
state or position, or causes damage to a state facility or natural resource, or
which attempts to compel an officer or employee to take action or refrain from
taking action within the scope of his duties due to threats."
This
definition of terrorism is unlike that in most Western nations
where terrorism is generally defined to include violence or
other acts that are intended to instil terror in the general
population with a goal of forcing governments to take or refrain from
taking a certain position on an issue.
It is
important to note that the law not only applies inside the Saudi kingdom, it
also applies to:
"...anyone, whether of Saudi or foreign
nationality, who commits or aids and abets in the commission of an
offense described in this law while outside the kingdom of law whose aim
is the following:
1 - Regime
change in Saudi Arabia.
2 -
Abolition of the Constitution or any part thereof
3 -
Download State to do or abstain.
4 - Assault
on Saudis abroad.
5 - Damage
to Saudi public property abroad, including embassies or other diplomatic or
consular premises.
6 -
Commission of a terrorist crime while on board a Saudi-flagged or registered
vessel or means of transport.
7 -
Commission of an act undertaken to sabotage the economy, undermine national
security or social interests of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia."
Those who
are arrested can be detained for a period of up to six months to permit
the Saudi authorities to investigate the offence. If the offence requires
further investigation, detention can be extended for another six months and for
an unlimited period of time if a court order is granted. Detainees are
not released on bail unless the release is authorized by order of the Minister of the Interior. During an
investigation, authorized representatives of the Minister of the Interior do
not require a warrant to enter and search the homes and offices of a potential
offender. Detainees can also be held incommunicado for 60 to 90 days
after arrest. According to the United Nation's Special Rapporteur on
Torture, torture is most likely to occur during the period of time when the
detainee is not allowed to contact the outside world as shown here:
"Torture is most
frequently practised during incommunicado detention. Incommunicado detention
should be made illegal, and persons held incommunicado should be released
without delay. Information regarding the time and place of arrest as well as
the identity of the law enforcement officials having carried out the arrest
should be scrupulously recorded; similar information should also be recorded
regarding the actual detention, the state of health upon arrival at the
detention centre, as well as the time the next of kin and lawyer were contacted
and visited the detainee. Legal provisions should ensure that detainees are
given access to legal counsel within 24 hours of detention. "
As we can see in this video, Saudi police are far from reluctant to use torture:
These
aspects of the new law completely undermines the concept of due
process, granting the Interior Minister, currently Prince Muhammad bin
Naif bin Abdulaziz, a member of the Saudi Royal family and a potential successor to
King Abdullah, unfettered power.
I found
this part particularly interesting. The Saudi kingdom is setting up
"specialized centres...for the purposes of the rehabilitiation of
those arrested and convicted of any offenses under this law in order to
correct their thoughts and strengthen their community ties."
Investigative authorities can also admit individuals that have been
informed upon and that are suspected and feared into the rehabilitation centres
rather than detaining them.
Human
Rights Watch notes that this new so-called terrorism law is extremely
broad and that it allows Saudi authorities to criminalize free speech,
particularly speech that is against the Saudi royal family. Saudis are
not allowed to participate in or promote sit-ins, protests or meetings that may
harm the "unity or stability of the kingdom".
Saudi
Arabia has a long history of persecuting and prosecuting dissidents.
Human rights activists Abdullah al-Hamid and Mohammed al-Qahtani,
founders of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association, are currently
serving eleven and ten year sentences respectively for "breaking
allegiances with the ruler, spreading chaos and destabilizing public order
and questioning the integrity of officials". Their crime? The
two men and a group of other reformists signed a petition calling for Crown
Prince Nayef to be removed as Crown Prince because he was "not fit to be
the next king", largely because during his tenure as Minister of the
Interior, tens of thousand so detainees had been poorly treated.
What I
always find amazing is the West's hypocrisy when it comes to dealing with the
repressive Saudi regime. When other nations such as Iraq, Iran, North
Korea et al crush human rights, governments from Canada, the United States and
Europe are quick to offer condemnation. When Saudi Arabia crushes
free speech, it's okay because, after all, the West needs their world-class
supply of oil to grease the wheels of the developed world's economy.
...and, just in case we wondered how concerned Saudi Arabia is about terrorism, they are so spooked by the prospect of ISIS in Iraq that they are proposing to build a 1000 kilometre (600 mile) long wall along the border with Iraq as shown here.
...and, just in case we wondered how concerned Saudi Arabia is about terrorism, they are so spooked by the prospect of ISIS in Iraq that they are proposing to build a 1000 kilometre (600 mile) long wall along the border with Iraq as shown here.
The second video shows the world what barbaric animals these escapees from the stone age really are. Absolutely disgusting behavior.
ReplyDeleteAt some point someone is going to drop the mother of all bombs on those savages, and turn the desert into glass. I won't shed a tear for the innocent victims... They, after all, have done NOTHING to make this stupid shit stop.
The Saudis also have a wall built along the Yemen border. Not sure if it runs along the entire border or just part but they seem to like walls. As US Foreign policy goes as long as they are “OUR” guys they can do as they please, it’s the ones that aren’t on board with what the US wants the are the problem.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi%E2%80%93Yemen_barrier
The wall is being built to reduce smuggling drugs
DeleteNope to protect the corrupted dark age ...piggy regime!
DeleteLot of anonymity here, unfortunately. I do not understand the support given the ruling family by America. Anything to keep the Middle East and Central Asia in an uproar, I guess.
ReplyDeleteI do not know if you do requests, but can you do a post explaining the impact of a country being unable to pay its debts and defaulting? What is the impact on the country and on its creditors? Argentina has done this. Russia did it in 1998 (after getting enough cash from the IMF that the oligarchs were able to get out of rubles). Right now Ukraine and Russia are sitting in default position and the new government in Greece may well tell its creditors (the Troika) to take a hike.
ReplyDeletelong live KSA
ReplyDelete