Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Friday, November 16, 2007 | Reason : Political | print version Print | Comments

Document Saudi gang-rape victim is jailed

by BBC

Thanks to Abhilash Nambiar for the link.

Reposted from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7096814.stm

saudi arabia
Saudi women are subject to strict sex segregation laws

An appeal court in Saudi Arabia has doubled the number of lashes and added a jail sentence as punishment for a woman who was gang-raped.

The victim was initially punished for violating laws on segregation of the sexes - she was in an unrelated man's car at the time of the attack.

When she appealed, the judges said she had been attempting to use the media to influence them.

The attackers' sentences - originally of up to five years - were doubled.

Extra penalties

According to the Arab News newspaper, the 19-year-old woman, who is from Saudi Arabia's Shia minority, was gang-raped 14 times in an attack in the eastern province a year-and-a-half ago.

Seven men from the majority Sunni community were found guilty of the rape and sentenced to prison terms ranging from just under a year to five years.

But the victim was also punished for violating Saudi Arabia's laws on segregation that forbid unrelated men and women from associating with each other. She was initially sentenced to 90 lashes for being in the car of a strange man.

On appeal, the Arab News reported that the punishment was not reduced but increased to 200 lashes and a six-month prison sentence.

The rapists also had their prison terms doubled. But the sentences are still low considering they could have faced the death penalty.

The Arab News quoted an official as saying the judges had decided to punish the girl for trying to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media.

The victim's lawyer was suspended from the case, has had his licence to work confiscated, and faces a disciplinary session.
submit to delicious Add to del.icio.us Posted: Friday, November 16, 2007 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 37 of 37 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #88401 by Vinelectric on November 16, 2007 at 1:35 pm

avatarBloody hell!

We're not going tabloid now. Or are we, Josh?

Other Comments by Vinelectric

2. Comment #88403 by jimbob on November 16, 2007 at 1:37 pm

Ain't religious morality wonderful!?

Other Comments by jimbob

3. Comment #88407 by arogop on November 16, 2007 at 1:48 pm

avatarAnd to think we buy their oil. Reason enough to buy E85 fuel.

Other Comments by arogop

4. Comment #88408 by Diacanu on November 16, 2007 at 1:54 pm

avatarjimjob-

Ain't religious morality wonderful!?


*Sarcasticly sings "our God is an awsome God", from Songs4Worship with an impression of the glazed zombie look of the chick in the ad*

Other Comments by Diacanu

5. Comment #88414 by Diacanu on November 16, 2007 at 2:08 pm

avatarOh, and in case I wasn't clear, I agree, this shit is gut shriveling vileness.


Other Comments by Diacanu

6. Comment #88421 by NormanDoering on November 16, 2007 at 2:35 pm

arogop wrote:
Reason enough to buy E85 fuel.

Reason enough to invest billions in creating the infrastructure needed for a wind/solar/hydrogen fuel economy.

Other Comments by NormanDoering

7. Comment #88428 by PrimeNumbers on November 16, 2007 at 3:10 pm

avatarCome on, these are the benefits of Islam that Dr Bari wants for England! They must be good if Dr Bari wants them....

Other Comments by PrimeNumbers

8. Comment #88441 by HeathenAngel on November 16, 2007 at 4:46 pm

avatarOn topic: This is just disgusting and it's a horrible atrocity. Getting religionists to realize it, however is like trying to nail jell-o to a tree. They like the "Not my god" response quite well in this area of Ohio.

Off topic:
Diacanu,

Awww, come on. Don't knock gospel music. I agree with Carlin when he said it's the only good thing to ever come out of religion. I have quite a bit of it saved on my computer and frequently surprise the **** out of people who know me, by listening to it. I'm probably one of the most militant atheists (whatever that means) in this tiny backwater town. So it is shocking for some when I crank up the media player.

Other Comments by HeathenAngel

9. Comment #88478 by Fanusi Khiyal on November 17, 2007 at 1:58 am

I am eagerly awaiting the usual suspects telling me how this is all due to western foreign policy.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

10. Comment #88480 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 17, 2007 at 2:10 am

avatar 6. Comment #88421 by NormanDoering on November 16, 2007 at 2:35 pm
arogop wrote:

Reason enough to buy E85 fuel.


Reason enough to invest billions in creating the infrastructure needed for a wind/solar/hydrogen fuel economy.

Or shifting a fraction of the Trillion $'s plus spent annually on weapons, to fusion research. A measly 6 billion is all the most powerful countries in the world could scrape together? Yet, somehow they find a trillion each year for the military. Absurd, disgraceful and pissing me off.

Mind you a $ doesn't go as far as it used to ... good or bad news?

Awww, come on. Don't knock gospel music.

Likewise. I still love Don Francisco for some inexplicable reason ...

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

11. Comment #88481 by NJS on November 17, 2007 at 2:11 am

The worst thing about it is that they will use her as an example of why the laws exist - mix with men and you will be raped - and it will serve you right.

Other Comments by NJS

12. Comment #88496 by Logicel on November 17, 2007 at 5:40 am

avatarWhen she appealed, the judges said she had been attempting to use the media to influence them.
_____

More like publicity was causing the judges discomfort--f'cking bastards.

Other Comments by Logicel

13. Comment #88507 by Logicel on November 17, 2007 at 6:55 am

avatar...the punishment was not reduced but increased to 200 lashes
_____

I don't have the stomach right now to research my own questions, so I will muse out loud: when does such a punishment of lashings become a death sentence? Is there medical treatment given after the lashings or is she sent to her cell without any treatment? Is it a male that lashes her, and is she partially or completely unclothed while being lashed?

Friggin' sadistic control freaks--try educating your men how to control their desires for sexual power and domination, and leave their victims out of the punishment equation.

Other Comments by Logicel

14. Comment #88512 by kaiserkriss on November 17, 2007 at 8:08 am

avatar"She was in an unrelated man's car at the time"..

NOT TRUE. Given that our species can trace its origins to a group of about 800 individuals living approximately 180 000 years ago, it would seem especially in a closely knit clan culture as that which exists in Saudi Arabia, this poor woman was indeed in a "related" man's car.

Which begs the question at what point is one no longer related to someone else: 4 generations?, 5 generations?? Is it written in the koran or hadith? Just goes to show how foolish some of these man made rules are.

These "judges" together with the perpetrators should be hung up by their testicles for 48 hours, for surely it can be interpreted somewhere in the "holy books" that injustice and "lust" should be punished for their less than pure thoughts. jcw

Other Comments by kaiserkriss

15. Comment #88514 by Fanusi Khiyal on November 17, 2007 at 8:41 am

. Getting religionists to realize it, however is like trying to nail jell-o to a tree. They like the "Not my god" response quite well in this area of Ohio.


That's because, unless you are referring to devout Muslims, that isn't their god. Let's get real here - this isn't 'devout religionists' but devout Muslims. No other faith sanctions such horrors.

Sam Harris notes that Christians rightly get ticked when each criticism of Islam is balanced by one of Christianity. Most religious people are horrified by this, and it does us absolutely no good to lump in Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs etc. with the Muslim fanatics.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

16. Comment #88581 by Corylus on November 18, 2007 at 12:07 am

avatar
The victim's lawyer was suspended from the case, has had his licence to work confiscated, and faces a disciplinary session.

Below is an interesting article about this particular lawyer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/22/AR2006122201579.html


No wonder the powers that be want him out of their courtrooms. Sounds like one of the reasons they are torturing (there is no other term for it) this poor girl is to get to him.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7098480.stm

So much for justice.

Other Comments by Corylus

17. Comment #88584 by briancoughlanworldcitizen on November 18, 2007 at 12:23 am

avatar16. Comment #88581 by Corylus on November 18, 2007 at 12:07 am
avatar

The victim's lawyer was suspended from the case, has had his licence to work confiscated, and faces a disciplinary session.

What amazing and courageous muslims these two are. I sincerely hope they find justice, and change the law, at the very least they have exposed the utter hypocrisy of the religious establishment, that is always a good start.

Other Comments by briancoughlanworldcitizen

18. Comment #88588 by Goldy on November 18, 2007 at 12:59 am

From Arab News in Arabia. Write letters to them - they generally publish them :-)
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1&section=0&article=103685&d=18&m=11&y=2007

Other Comments by Goldy

19. Comment #88594 by Russell Blackford on November 18, 2007 at 1:57 am

Like any other sane person reading this, I'm outraged by the barbarism and cruelty (I've blogged on the same topic, as has Udo Schuklenk, and I imagine a lot of other sensible people).

I almost shot off an angry comment to Arab News, but before I do anything like that I wonder whether it's the wisest thing to do in the woman's own interests. A whole lot of public attacks in a high-profile forum in the Middle East, by outraged decadent foreigners, might just worsen her plight.

Does anyone know what would be the most effective way for us to help this young woman? E.g., does Amnesty International have any plan to try to assist? Is there some way that donations could help, and any place where they could be sent? Or should we just demonstrate that the outside world holds Saudi justice in abhorrence?

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

20. Comment #88664 by Goldy on November 18, 2007 at 12:37 pm

Russell, if the Saudis don't hear, what use complaining. Believe me it's not just foreigners that write in disgust. Ordinary Saudis are not too fond of having these things done in the name of Islam - it puts the religion in a bad light and shows the people to be barbarians. Let them know how you feel - and it can't do the woman too much harm (considering what she's going through, how much worse can it get?) if authorities know they are being scrutinised by ordinary voters ouside of their country - voters that hopefully can determine what the House of Saud receive from "friendly" governments...

Other Comments by Goldy

21. Comment #88790 by irate_atheist on November 19, 2007 at 2:07 am

avatarScum.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

22. Comment #88804 by hungarianelephant on November 19, 2007 at 2:36 am

avatarComments 6 (NormanDoering) and 10 (briancoughlanworldcitizen)

Keep banging this drum.

Oil is the key to draining the Middle East swamp. The Arab League and Iran together have GDP slightly in excess of Italy, and 75% is oil revenue. Take out the oil and the kleptocrats follow.

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

23. Comment #89023 by L.Minnik on November 19, 2007 at 2:05 pm

In Dubai, a 15 year old - Alex - was raped by 3 men, one of which is HIV positive. Alex's lawyer warned him that he was "in danger of facing charges of homosexuality and a prison term of one year."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/world/middleeast/01dubai.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp

Other Comments by L.Minnik

24. Comment #89423 by Goldy on November 20, 2007 at 4:46 pm

Letters in the Arab News today
(http://www.arabnews.com/)

Punishing the Victims

I cannot believe what I just read in Ebtihal Mubarak's story "Qatif Court Convicts Rape Victim" (Nov. 13). How on earth can a rape victim be punished for getting raped? How can Saudi Arabia let this happen? This is so grotesque and unfair that I do not have words to describe my emotions. Justice demands that the men should spend their lifetimes in jail. I can only pray that the people responsible for this sentence will come to their senses before it is too late. We will all be judged for what we do in our lifetime.


Guro Vasdal, Turkey published 21 November 2007


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Punishing the Victims [2]

Kudos to this justice system. It never ceases to surprise me. If you get raped or assaulted, keep silent.


Anoob Hakim Abdul Kader, United Kingdom published 21 November 2007


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Punishing the Victims [3]

This is the sickest thing I have read in all my 74 years. What is wrong with the Middle East? Those who live there are still in the Dark Ages.


Joe Gill, United States published 21 November 2007


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Punishing the Victims [4]

I find it difficult to believe that an intelligent, dignified people would allow the whipping and imprisonment of a woman who was gang-raped by the most disgusting of wretches. Her punishment was then doubled because she complained. Her attorney debarred. This is an act of barbarism. Where are the men among you?


Paul Hall, Riyadh published 21 November 2007


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Punishing the Victims [5]

As a well-traveled Australian citizen, I have come to learn and respect the laws, religion and tradition of many beautiful places worldwide. However, upon reading of a woman lashed and jailed, despite being a victim of rape, I must rethink this level of respect. Sure, she disobeyed a law. But surely the role of the presiding judge should be fairness and law, not retribution for appealing. Please do not destroy the life of an innocent woman.


Corey, Australia published 21 November 2007

An opinion in the editorial page
A Slap in the Face of Justice
Lubna Hussain, forlubna@hotmail.com

It is a tale that is more reminiscent of the cruel callous punishments meted out to women in medieval times. And yet sadly it is a case that is making headlines in the 21st century.

For those of you who are not aware of the story, an 18-year-old girl from Qatif went to meet a man she had had a prior relationship with to reclaim photos that he threatened to blackmail her with. While they were standing outside a shopping mall, they were abducted at knifepoint. She was gang raped 14 times by seven men. The man accompanying her was also raped. In an extraordinary ruling, she was sentenced by the courts to 90 lashes for having been with a man who was not her male relative. When she appealed this verdict, expecting leniency under the extenuating circumstances, the court increased her sentence to 200 lashes and six months imprisonment. This increased sentence was delivered under the spurious pretext that the judiciary would not be "aggravated and influenced" through the media. Her lawyer has been suspended from the case, has had his license confiscated and is now being threatened with disciplinary action.

I will never forget reading about this case when it was first documented several months ago. I blinked hard in disbelief at the ridiculous contents of the article and the trite absurdity of the allegations. It was enough to offend the sensibilities of any reasonable minded human being and yet, it seemed at the time, that those who are in charge of our judicial system were totally devoid of any sense of justice. It is this peculiar irony that has subsequently subverted and distorted the outcome of a trial that will no doubt characterize the level of injustice that we can expect to be afforded through the courts.

Here is a young woman who has had to suffer the unimaginable ordeal of being brutally raped by seven men 14 times but nonetheless decided to take the remarkably brave step and approach the authorities expecting at the very least a fair trial and perhaps, albeit unrealistically, a degree of compassion.

Indeed, as has been shown by the insanity of the proceedings she would have been well advised to privately deal with the physical and psychological scars that this heinous act had incurred. Instead of being applauded for breaking social taboos and enduring the consequences of revisiting the trauma that she must have acutely suffered in bringing her case forward, she now stands in the same dock as her rapists accused of being complicit in perpetrating the crime. According to the courts, she should not have been with a man who was not her male guardian in the first place. The judges looked into their crystal ball and saw that she had "the intention of doing something bad" and this therefore constituted a very good reason for her to be gang raped. Always the woman's fault, but of course!

How does any of this make sense when practically all women in the Kingdom rely on the services of a man who is not their guardian? We live day and night in the closest of proximity with our drivers who by no means can be classified as eunuchs, having been deprived of the company of their wives for up to two years. And yet such a close relationship is deemed OK by the very same men in power who can punish a rape victim for being out in public with an equally "strange" man only because he doesn't happen to be employed by her. Even though the judgment in this case is shocking, it is hardly surprising when you analyze the twisted reasoning it is based upon.

To add grotesque insult to injury, the lawyer defending the victim is now perceived as being public enemy No. 1 because he is producing tangible evidence supported by Islamic precedents and principles to show how ridiculous and contrary to the faith the ruling is. Rather than accept their failings, and redress the situation by backing down after the second hearing requesting a reduction in the girl's sentence, the courts have amply demonstrated that the process of appeal is tantamount to begging for a tougher punishment. It also extends a warning to lawyers not to defend victims of such heinous crimes lest they lose their right to practice at all.

So what is the wider message being delivered to us citizens who may, God forbid, find ourselves at the mercy of the justice system here? Stay at home and keep our mouths shut. And to the outside world? I will leave this to your imagination. Suffice it to say that no amount of money spent on PR is going to be able to whitewash the irreparable damage caused by grave injustices such as this.

And finally
Qatif Case Verdicts Get Ministry's Backing
Ebtihal Mubarak, Arab News

JEDDAH, 21 November 2007 — The Ministry of Justice made its first public statement regarding the second verdict in the so-called "Qatif Girl" rape trial, justifying the decision to punish the victims with lashes and jail time on the basis of "some proved charges."

The statement, which was released through the official Saudi Press Agency, said the ministry "welcomes objective criticism that benefits the general good, away from emotional responses."

Last week "Qatif Girl", whose name has not been released to protect her identity, and a male companion saw their sentences increased from 90 lashes to 200 lashes and six months in jail on orders by the Higher Court of Justice.

The two were found guilty of being in a state of khalwa, when an unrelated man and woman are found together, prior to their abduction and rape. The sentences of the seven men found guilty of abducting and repeatedly raping the young woman and her male companion were also increased to between two and nine years each.

The decision to increase the punishments came after the woman's lawyer, Abdul Rahman Al-Lahem, requested that the courts review the sentences issued to the rapists.

Al-Lahem argued that the men should be put to death on the basis of "hiraba" in Shariah law, which refers to the need for capital punishment for certain violent crimes that spread social "corruption and decomposition".

The lawyer further argued that the courts should reconsider the original sentences of the men and issue a verdict known as "hadd" — a clear verdict of death based on the laws in the Qur'an and the Sunnah.

The judges disagreed, and chose to issue their verdicts based on "ta'azir," a judicial interpretation of Shariah law.

The ministry said in its statement yesterday that the court didn't have sufficient evidence to pursue a "hiraba" verdict. The ministry argued that the death penalty verdict ("hiraba") could not be issued without "two witnesses or a confession from the accusers that is not retracted." (The men had initially confessed to the crime, but later retracted their confessions.)

The ministry also said yesterday in its statement that anyone has a right to appeal verdicts, but also warned of "stirring up agitation through the media that may not be objective and cannot grant anyone any right as much as it can negatively affect the other parties involved in the case."

The ministry statement used the term "the woman and her male friend" and "the woman and her companion" without referring to either of them as rape victims.

The Qatif General Court also revoked Al-Lahem's license to practice law for "disobeyingrules and regulations" at a hearing during Ramadan, according to yesterday's statement from the ministry.


The statement didn't elaborate on the nature of the violations the lawyer allegedly committed in the courtroom.

Al-Lahem told Arab News on Sunday that the incident was sparked when he objected to the presence of the rapists in the courtroom, saying that under Saudi law she did not need to be present and in the same room with her attackers.

Yesterday's ministry statement concluded by saying the Qatif Court judges "asked that the lawyer's violations be looked at by the disciplinary committee according to the system."


Other Comments by Goldy

25. Comment #90109 by tieInterceptor on November 23, 2007 at 2:44 am

avatarthis story is amazing, it reminds me why there is good reasons to be "bitter" about all the politically correct minded people in the west who have no problem saying that this particular case is horrible, but can't bring themselves to denounce the ideology and social system that culminated in a law and ruling that sentenced a rape victim to prison and leashing and ended the career of a lawyer for doing his job.
But the politically correct say "it would be hypocrite of us to pass judgement on their way of thinking".

bleah,

Other Comments by tieInterceptor

26. Comment #90121 by Flagellant on November 23, 2007 at 4:44 am

avatarWouldn't it have been better to have invaded Saudi Arabia rather than Iraq? Iraq had bugger-all to do with 9/11, whereas the majority (15 of 19) of the suicide gang were Wahhabi Arabs from Saudi Arabia. Coincidence? Not likely.

This tragic nonsense only reinforces the opinion.



Truly, god is grott and infinitely merdeiful.

Other Comments by Flagellant

27. Comment #90122 by Diacanu on November 23, 2007 at 4:52 am

avatartieInterceptor-

Hmm, I don't know what people you know, or what media you're reading, but I've never seen this "we can't judge their culture", viewpoint.

Oh, I've seen it as a strawman, but I've never seen the real thing.
Maybe it's out there somewhere, and I'm not looking in the right spots, I dunno.
*Shrug*

Other Comments by Diacanu

28. Comment #90123 by Diacanu on November 23, 2007 at 4:56 am

avatarFlagellent-

Hey now, we can't go after Saudi Arabia, they're our pusher.

Hypocrisy? Shh, shuddup, shuddup, here, watch these crappy new reality shows, and wash it down with Mountain Dew.

Other Comments by Diacanu

29. Comment #90126 by hungarianelephant on November 23, 2007 at 5:10 am

avatarDiacanu - Try dinner parties in North London, student union meetings, gatherings of secondary school teachers or local councils. I've heard it at all of the above. I've even heard an openly gay man defend the regime in Tehran, a week after it hung two young men from a crane for the heinous offence of having consensual sex in private.

Hang around bbc.co.uk for a few days and you'll find the assumption, if not the positive argument, there too. These are people who refuse to call the 7/7 bombers "terrorists".

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

30. Comment #90127 by Russell Blackford on November 23, 2007 at 5:25 am

I did actually try to send a message to Arab News, but I keep getting an error message.

This is what I sent, but it appears not to have gone through. I'm happy to be quoted on it, but I guess there's not a lot more to be done:

It strains credulity that a young woman - particularly the victim of a horrifying gang rape - could be jailed and subjected to a physical beating with two hundred lashes simply for being in the company of a man who is not her relative.

The Saudi authorities should understand how the rest of the world views this episode. It makes the justice system of Saudi Arabia appear irrational, cruel, and barbaric.

Russell Blackford
Melbourne, Australia

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

31. Comment #90128 by Russell Blackford on November 23, 2007 at 5:28 am

Diacanu, you'll come across that sort of naive moral relativism all the time if you move in the right (it is usually left, actually) circles.

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

32. Comment #90129 by Vaal on November 23, 2007 at 5:31 am

avatarHungarianelephant

Agreed. You just have to look at the BBC HYS website to see so called civilised liberal people in the West supporting cultural relativism, no matter how abominable and ethically barren.

This mindset should be confronted at all times. I am particularly dismayed that any student at a University could argue in support of this barbarism. However, I wouldn't be surprised at Islamic apologists, who would jump through hoops tarred and feathered if taught that this was in their "holy book".

It never ceases to amaze me how intelligent people can be so irrational and intransigent when the meme of religion is inculcated into them in their formative years. No wonder RD argues that it can be considered as a form of child abuse.

Other Comments by Vaal

33. Comment #90145 by Chris Hagan on November 23, 2007 at 7:04 am

Saudi Arabia - home of Mecca and yet the most god-forsaken place on earth. Shame on the British Government for selling arms to this country.

Britain - "But what about Human Rights?"

Saudi Arabia - "Sorry, we can't quite hear you because of the deafening noise of you kissing our arses to get our oil."

Britain - "Forget we even mentioned it. Here, have some fighter jets."

Other Comments by Chris Hagan

34. Comment #90199 by Goldy on November 23, 2007 at 12:44 pm

letters@aranews.com, I think is the address. It isn't much and there's not a lot that can really be done, though I hear that pressure from outside is forcing a reconsideration. Old Mrs Clinton is also disgusted and has sent strongly worded letters, apparently.

Other Comments by Goldy

35. Comment #90575 by Goldy on November 25, 2007 at 3:37 pm

Looks like world opinion counts for nothing...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/25/wsaudi125.xml

Other Comments by Goldy

36. Comment #90706 by Roy_H on November 26, 2007 at 7:26 am

You can call your little Muslim sprog Mohammed, but not your teddy bear!
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071126/tpl-uk-sudan-prophet-43a8d4f_4.html

Other Comments by Roy_H

37. Comment #91833 by arogop on November 29, 2007 at 12:16 pm

avatar37. Comment #90839 by helipilot16

E100 would be great, but unfortunately my Suburban and Tahoe can't run on it. It is also too hard to start in the winter. (I live in the north)

I will use E85 until my Hydrogen vehicle shows up in my driveway.

Other Comments by arogop
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: