Women’s driving and the mahram (male guardianship) have been two of the most pressing and controversial issues in the country during the past few years. However, serious debate regarding these issues has been almost absent from the local media in the past few weeks.
I slightly noticed the absence, but I thought it could be that people simply got sick of endlessly discussing these issues without seeing any visible progress. But I was wrong. According to Dr. Abdul-Rahman Al-Enad, member of Shoura Council, the Ministry of (dis)Information have secretly ordered the newspapers to ban any article on these two issues. He didn’t explain why MOI have taken such measures, but the message is clear: they don’t want anyone to talk about this.
Dr. Al-Enad, who is also a founding member of NSHR, revealed this secret and other juicy bits during a lecture on human rights and freedom of expression that he gave to a group of journalism students and teachers at KSU last Saturday.
Truth be told, I was a bit hesitant to attend the lecture because my recent experiences with Shoura Council members were not particularly encouraging. I’m glad to report this wasn’t the case this time. Dr. Al-Enad was frank, blunt and refreshingly as cool as a Shoura member can be.
He started his talk with a brief introduction on the principles of human rights and the international laws, then quickly moved to focus on the importance of free speech as a fundamental and indispensable right for the citizens any developing nation.
Dr. Al-Enad said that although the Press and Publications Law states that “freedom of press is protected in line with laws and Sharia,” such statement has no basis in The Basic Law, which serves as a constitution, where Article 39 states: “Mass media and all other vehicles of expression shall employ civil and polite language, contribute towards the education of the nation and strengthen unity. It is prohibited to commit acts leading to disorder and division, affecting the security of the state and its public relations, or undermining human dignity and rights. Details shall be specified in the Law.”
The devil is in the details. The Basic Law refers you to the Press and Publications Law, which in turn doesn’t offers much details. All what the latter has to offer is the vague sentence “in line with laws and Sharia.” What laws and what interpretation of Sharia, no one exactly knows.
As I previously said here, The Basic Law should be amended to enumerate the rights and duties of citizens, and one of these rights is freedom of expression. Dr. Al-Enad agrees, but says the problem is that the Shoura Council has no right to amend The Basic Law. Actually, the Council doesn’t even have the right to modify its own rules. Only the King has the power to do that.
However, the Council has the authority to review and approve lower laws. One of these laws is the E-Crimes Act, which has been passed in March 2007. I am concerned because the act contained some articles that are very stretchy and non-specific, and they can be easily used to target freedom of expression online.
I went to ask Dr. Al-Enad about this law after he finished his lecture. He told me he does not remember the details of the law, and asked if he can contact me later to talk about this. I gave him my card, and I’m still waiting to hear from him. Can I trust the Shoura Council to act positively to protect human rights and free speech, at least on this particular case? For now, I’m reserving my judgment until the esteemed member and I get a chance to talk. Because, you know, it’s always good to talk.
6 thoughts on “It’s Good to Talk”
Yes it’s always good and “easier” to talk…It’s not only that members of the Shoura council are not fully powerful as decision maker, it’s also the society in general, no interest groups or advocates for any changes are working seriously to push decision makers for any positive changes, people are either happy with the way things are or simply lack the organizational structure and power needed to make such a change…
It’s clear, in saying, “It is prohibited to commit acts leading to disorder and division,” that this means no conversation which upsets the status quo is to be permitted. Debate of an issue (meaning there is more than one point of view) is clearly viewed as “disorder and division.”
So very clearly, the only articles permitted are those that support current laws, and current points of view.
Dedicated Elementary Teacher Overseas (in the Middle East)
You know what Ahmed, I was talking to my father last week about the Women’s driving in our country.. He said something really made me stop thinking or even dreaming that my wife could take my kids to the school or to a mall while I am busy at the Hospital. My father said in the time that our Neighbors in the GCC discussing woman’s elections and woman involve in political decision, we still in Saudi Arabia still discuss can woman drive or not! The fact is the change must come.. when.. still thinking
HAHAHA women rights and human rights? Does our great esteemed so called Islamic society consider women human beings? I don’t think so.
we are just like those medieval scholars who claim that ” A woman is defective and misbegoten” meaning, she’s supposed to be born a male, but do to some defects, she mutated and became a female.
actually, I believe our great society employs the (tiring) policy. what’s this?
it’s to make us talk, talk, and talk…then spread vague promises about the situationg being fixed until we get tired of it…and so we forget all about it.
I can tell u for sure that it works perfectly. I’m sick and tired of discussing women rights and the driving issue since I’m usually given wonderfull lables afterwards such as: athiest, westrener, liberal( with the negative meaning), secular, and so on. one even accused me of not praying for bringning the matter up.
please tell us what he has to say. we’ll be waiting.
sorry for the blabber
Didn’t you know the lines, “I can’t remember” are infamous lines or code for “I am lying” or “Bug off” etc.?
Rebellious: I have seriously thought of becoming a Jew and moving to Israel. Maybe I would have more rights! If we can’t even discuss our rights without being accused of something why not just be it!
Comments are closed.