Saudi Arabia to execute woman for 'witchcraft'

[Peikko 1,575]

BEIRUT, Lebanon - A leading human rights group appealed to Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah on Thursday to stop the execution of a woman accused of witchcraft and performing supernatural acts.

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said in a statement that the kingdom's religious police who arrested and interrogated Fawza Falih, and the judges who tried her in the northern town of Quraiyat never gave her the opportunity to prove her innocence in the face of "absurd charges that have no basis in law."

Falih's case underscores shortcomings in Saudi Arabia's Islamic legal system in which rules of evidence are shaky, lawyers are not always present and sentences often depend on the whim of judges.

The most frequent victims are women, who already suffer severe restrictions on daily life in Saudi Arabia: They cannot drive, appear before a judge without a male representative, or travel abroad without a male guardian's permission.

Witchcraft is considered an offense against Islam in the conservative kingdom.

In Falih's case, the judges relied on a coerced confession and on the statements of witnesses who said she had "bewitched" them to convict her in April 2006, according to the group.

Falih later retracted her confession in court, claiming it was extracted under duress, and said that as an illiterate woman, she did not understand the document she was forced to fingerprint.

"The fact that Saudi judges still conduct trials for unprovable crimes like 'witchcraft' underscores their inability to carry out objective criminal investigations," said Joe Stork, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch.

There was no immediate comment on the statement from Saudi Arabia, where government offices are closed on Thursdays, the start of the Muslim weekend.

"Fawza Falih's case is an example of how the authorities failed to comply even with existing safeguards in the Saudi justice system," he added.

The Saudi court cited an instance in which a man allegedly became impotent after being bewitched by Falih, the rights group said.

An appeals court ruled in September 2006 that Falih could not be sentenced to death for witchcraft because she had retracted her confession. But a lower court subsequently reissued the death sentence for the benefit of "public interest" and to "protect the creed, souls and property of this country," the group's statement said.

Link

Another 'silly' woman? Still, it's their country and they have every right to make any laws they like. How dare any one criticize this based on 'our' intepretation of what constitutes human rights?

[Alex+R 0]

C'mon PH. It's just a cultural difference. We need to respect their right to properly execute their witches.

[Ban Hammer 14,297]

C'mon PH. It's just a cultural difference. We need to respect their right to properly execute their witches.

maybe they are just giving cindy sheehan fair warning.....

[Jenn! 918]

At what point do these sorts of things become our business?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

... shortcomings in Saudi Arabia's Islamic legal system in which rules of evidence are shaky, lawyers are not always present and sentences often depend on the whim of judges.

Sounds like Texas.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Okay... I'm going to attempt to explain my position once more. If some individuals on here don't understand it, then that's their problem.

I believe that someone can personally disagree with a position yet understand it. In relating to the current topic, I don't agree with them executing "witches" (or anyone) for crimes they haven't been proven guilty for. However, it is not our right or duty as foreigners to their country to make them change their ways.

The most we can do is urge and suggest they adopt more Western principles. If they choose to, then that's great; if they don't, then our hands our tied -- unless we want another disaster on our hands like the situation in Iraq (since military action would be the only effective option).

It's my firm belief that in order to get someone to change, you must understand their position. Ordering someone else to change because "you told them so" and "they're wrong; you're right" and "do it or else" only forms feelings of resentment and will prove to create the exact opposite of what you had wanted in the first place. If you can understand where it is they are coming from and why they are doing it (instead of merely passing them off as "deranged, backwards, misanthropic, sexist, or just plain evil"), you'll have a far greater chance at getting them to listen to you.

Now... if some people on here still believe I lack any sort of concept regarding human rights or that I just "don't care," then I'm sorry, but you've missed the point entirely. I'm not sure how else I can explain it to you so you'll understand. B)

Edited February 14, 2008 by DeadPoolX

[Ban Hammer 14,297]

... shortcomings in Saudi Arabia's Islamic legal system in which rules of evidence are shaky, lawyers are not always present and sentences often depend on the whim of judges.

Sounds like Texas.

your honor, he needed a'killin.

[Jenn! 918]

But surely you must draw a line somewhere, no? What if they were executing all Jews (not that there are any there, but what if)?

[DeadPoolX 9]

But surely you must draw a line somewhere, no? What if they were executing all Jews (not that there are any there, but what if)?

I certainly wouldn't be happy, but if we have the right to go into another country and affect change, what's stopping another country from doing the same to us if they feel (for whatever reason) some of our practices need to be changed?

[Peikko 1,575]

At what point do these sorts of things become our business?

It would seem it is dependant on more than the 'injustice' of the issue involved. At some point the global community decided that apartheid was 'bad' and exerted a collective diplomatic force against South Africa which at least contributed to the abandonment of this abuse of human rights. Sadly, discrimination against women does not yet seem to evoke the same response. I am not sure if this is because some people really do believe that somehow these woman want to live such restricted lives, that their culture somehow precludes women from finding these kinds of discriminations in any way disturbing or unreasonable.

[Peikko 1,575]

But surely you must draw a line somewhere, no? What if they were executing all Jews (not that there are any there, but what if)?

I certainly wouldn't be happy, but if we have the right to go into another country and affect change, what's stopping another country from doing the same to us if they feel (for whatever reason) some of our practices need to be changed?

If you don't sign up to the principle of human rights, not a great deal. There has to be an absolute of 'acceptable behaviour' which is what the declaration of human rights sought to determine. However, as I pointed out, if you don't have an absolute then anything goes.

[almaty 19]

... shortcomings in Saudi Arabia's Islamic legal system in which rules of evidence are shaky, lawyers are not always present and sentences often depend on the whim of judges.

Sounds like Texas.

touche

[GaryC 7]

But surely you must draw a line somewhere, no? What if they were executing all Jews (not that there are any there, but what if)?

You mean like when the government gas's whole towns, has torture and rape chambers, does mass murder ect.. Is that where the line is for us to "do something" about it?

[DeadPoolX 9]

But surely you must draw a line somewhere, no? What if they were executing all Jews (not that there are any there, but what if)?

I certainly wouldn't be happy, but if we have the right to go into another country and affect change, what's stopping another country from doing the same to us if they feel (for whatever reason) some of our practices need to be changed?

If you don't sign up to the principle of human rights, not a great deal. There has to be an absolute of 'acceptable behaviour' which is what the declaration of human rights sought to determine. However, as I pointed out, if you don't have an absolute then anything goes.

Well, then... you must be a fan of Bush's "you're either with us or you're against us" speech, right? After all, you can't get a whole lot more "absolute" in defining "acceptable behavior" than that.

[Jenn! 918]

But surely you must draw a line somewhere, no? What if they were executing all Jews (not that there are any there, but what if)?

You mean like when the government gas's whole towns, has torture and rape chambers, does mass murder ect.. Is that where the line is for us to "do something" about it?

I'm not necessarily talking military force, Gary. And I sense the sarcasm and baiting in your post. I'm not in the mood, thanks.