Category Shoura Council

It’s Good to Talk

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.

Rights Bodies Appeal for Two Saudis

Human Rights Watch has urged courts in Jeddah to dismiss a case against Rai’f Badawi, founder of Saudi Liberals forums. On May 5, the prosecutor charged Badawi with “setting up an electronic site that insults Islam,” and referred the case to court, asking for a five-year prison sentence and a 3 million riyal fine.

Badawi no longer owns or controls the website. After unknown hackers, who probably think they were doing some sort of electronic jihad, attacked the website several times and threatened him and his family, he sold the website and fled the country two weeks ago. A new owner announced a while ago that he took over the website, which has been offline for more than a week now.

It is understood that Badawi will be tried according to the E-Crimes Act that has been issued in March 2007. The act, which can be found here (Arabic PDF), contains some laws that seem to target free speech such as Article 6 which incriminates “producing content which violates general order, religious values, public morals or sanctity of private life, or preparing it, or sending it, or storing it via the network or a computer.”

The questions is: who defines and specifies what are those religious values and what are those public morals? I don’t know if this act has been approved by the Shoura Council or not, because I think it is unacceptable for the Council to approve such act that contains these vague laws and articles which contradicts international conventions and accords on which Saudi Arabia is a signatory.

amnesty_logo On a related note, Amnesty International are appealing for Muhammad Ali Abu Raziza, a psychology professor at the University of Um al-Qura, who has been sentenced to 150 lashes and eight months’ imprisonment for meeting a woman in a coffee shop. There has been a lot of controversy surrounding this case and the reports on it in the local press has been full of contradictions. Therefor, I can’t make up my mind on who is at fault here.

However, I think the Commission should seriously reconsider how to define and deal with this whole “khulwa” thing. When a man and a woman meet in a public place like a cafe, a restaurant, or in the street where they are surrounded by people and others can see them, does it constitute a khulwa? I doubt that they will ever think this through but I guess it’s worth asking anyway.

What Civil Society?

When I was interviewed by Naif Abu-Saida on Orbit few months ago, I asked: “Do we, in Saudi Arabia, really have a civil society? There is no system or law regulating the functioning of civil society organizations.” Naif disagreed with me and insisted that there are such organizations and it was simply ignorant on my part to deny their existence.

The interview was mainly about blogging, but civil society got a mention during a call by fellow blogger Hadeel al-Hodhaif who touched on the issue. Since then, I’ve been meaning to write about this but never got around to do it and I finally decided to give it shot, so here it goes.

What Naif meant when he was talking about civil society organizations is mainly charities and philanthropic bodies. It is true that charities are usually included when citing examples for civil society institutions, but most literature on the subject is focused on the political element of these organizations, which aims to “facilitates better awareness and a more informed citizenry, who make better voting choices, participate in politics, and hold government more accountable as a result.”

Needless to say, such political element is clearly absent in this part of the world. Of course this has much to do with the fact that we don’t live in a democratic system because the civil society concept is closely linked to democracy and representation. As far as I know, Shoura Council have been discussing a new law for regulating civil society organizations that is expected to be voted on soon.

Until we find out what our esteemed Shoura members have been up to, my question for now is: considering our circumstances, can we here in Saudi Arabia actually call the many charities and philanthropic bodies functioning in the country civil society organizations?

The Weak End

It wasn’t unexpected at all, at least not to me: several members of the Shoura Council decided to use the religion card against a proposal to change the Kingdom’s official Thursday-Friday weekend to Friday and Saturday. It is truly a pity how some people in this country would shove religion in everything even when it has nothing to do with it. The weak arguments raised by these right honorable members of our esteemed council are “baseless,” just like one of them described the economic reasons cited for the change.

Frustrated, although absolutely not surprised, I find myself repeating what Tariq al-Maeena has said earlier this week: “Are they trying to frustrate efforts toward a more progressive and productive society? It seems to have worked in the past on other issues such as the liberalization of laws relating to women.” It seems to me that this is exactly the case: when you can’t find a reason to halt the change, hey, you can use religion. But you know what I’m eagerly waiting for now? A fatwa by the religious establishment here declaring that changing the weekend is going to make this nation go to hell in a handbasket.