Every year, on the 26th of June, the world observes the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, as it “serves as a call to action for all stakeholders including UN Member States, civil society, and individuals everywhere to unite in support of the hundreds of thousands of people around the world who have been victims of torture and those who are still tortured today” (United Nations, 2024).
The international day coincides with the entry into force of The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which is considered one of the essential tools of combating torture. In 1997, Saudi Arabia ratified the Convention. And in February 2001, the Saudi government reported to the Committee Against Torture that the Convention was implemented into national law by a royal decree, which allows citing its rules before courts of law and other legal and administrative authorities.
The Convention against Torture
Despite this trajectory that the government widely purports to have appeared in the context of banning and criminalising torture, this practice remains at the core of different official governmental bodies towards detainees in the absence of any serious steps to implement the international pledges undertaken by Saudi Arabia, most notably the Convention against Torture.
The ESOHR’s monitoring of numerous cases revealed many violations of the terms of the Convention. For example, Saudi Arabia blatantly violates Article 12, which stipulates that “Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction”; and Article 15, which stipulates that “Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings”.
These two violations appear clearly in the judgements against those sentenced to death, as the accused affirmed before the judges that they were subject to mental and physical torture. And their confessions were excised under torture. In spite of this, the judgement shows that these allegations were never investigated, and later court sessions are held without neither an investigation nor an answer to the accused’s requests that also include summoning video records of the interrogation or medical records that prove torture-resulted injuries.
In addition, the ESOHR has documented the expression used to issue judgements on those accused of murder, who backtracked on confessions extracted under torture. The expression appeared as “Following the withdrawal of his acknowledgement, which is a cause for doubt that sidelines the Hadd penalty, we therefore removed the Hirabah Hadd penalty and decided to execute him by Tazir”. This means that the the judges replaced the judgement that was supposed to be set by Islamic law (Sharia) with another that depends on the judge’s measure for sentencing due to the accused’s backtracking from their torture-extracted confessions, which form the fundamental basis for the judgement.
Official Promises
Saudi Arabia had went beyond promoting that its laws are compatible with the Convention, that it bans torture, and that its practices comply with its international commitments. Its official departments promoted claims of amnesty and kind treatment towards anyone who turns himself for being wanted, particularly those involved in cases relating to protests or freedom of expression.
Since the beginning of the events that Saudi Arabia witnessed in parallel to the “Arab Spring”, there were terror campaigns, arrests, and broadcasting of listed of wanted suspects. Those suspects were mostly wanted particularly for their involvement in the peaceful protests that the region of Qatif witnessed. This takes place under the distrust towards the judicial system, and with information about subjecting detainees to torture and mistreatment, as well as the death of some detainees as a result, which raises concern for their safety and liberty.
Certain Saudi official parties attempted to encourage those at the declared wanted lists, or those summoned, to turn themselves in, promising that their treatment on the one hand and reduced sentences on the other hand will all be taken into consideration.
The repeated promises, which also included amnesty promises, by the Ministry of Interior, the governor of the Eastern Province, pushed some of the wanted youth, and those summoned, to turn themselves in. Despite that, they faced severe violations, which included mistreatment, torture, and prolonged sentences that reached execution in some case.
The European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights points in this report to a number of cases that show the Saudi government’s handling of amnesty promises after a wanted person turns himself in:
Youssef Al-Manasef
The Special Criminal Court had sentenced Youssef Al-Manasef يوسف المناسف to death through Tazir, based on accusations that he was given as a minor. Currently, he awaits the Supreme Court’s decision, which is considered the final phase before carrying out the sentence. According to information received by ESOHR, Youssef, accompanied by his father, went to court to sign on papers that affirmed the reversal of a previous judgement of a three-month prison sentence for covering up crime. But after leaving the court, Al-Manasef was arrested, despite the fact that he went to court voluntarily and was not on the wanted-list. In addition to being on death row, he faced severe violations of torture and mistreatment throughout six months of solitary confinement that led him to faint and be admitted to hospital. Torture had also caused him compounded health issues and back pains.
Mohammed Hasan Al-Labbad
In September 2017, Al-Labbad’s family received a call that informed them that Mohammed had a summon for an investigation. Mohammed, accompanied by his father, then went to Almabahith’s (Directory of General Investigations) in Anak, where he was promised that he would be granted amnesty, especially while he did not face dangerous accusations. He was also asked to stay with the detective until the end of the investigation.
The treatment started to change after he was transferred to Almabahith prison in Dammam. Mohammed was subjected to a wide range of violations and severe mental and physical torture that lasted five months and 6 days, all under solitary confinement. He was subjected to beating, flogging by several persons using metallic wires, kicking, and suffocation by stepping on his neck, in addition to water-boarding, and having his hands and legs tied for prolonged periods of time. He also faced severe mental torture by being put in a very cold and dark room for days. He was also insulted and threatened with death and the rape of his siblings.
The torture he was subjected to led to repeated fainting, a drop in blood pressure, and a weak heartbeat, which put him in the hospital. The torture also led to continuous and continuous pain that prevented him from sleeping, in addition to long-term effects, including forgetfulness and lack of concentration.
Al-Labbad was forced to sign on confessions, and later was sentenced through Tazir by the Special Criminal Court.
Mojtaba Al-Safwani
In June 2012, Mojtaba Al-Safwani was summoned for an investigation as he turned himself in at the age of 16. Despite turning himself in, he was put in solitary confinement for a year and a half, where he faced different sorts of torture, including severe beating and interrogations that lasted hours, and humiliation. In addition, and in spite of being a minor, the General Prosecution requested the penalty of death for him, and he was later sentenced to thirteen years in prison on accusations relating to participating in protests.
Currently, despite completing his sentence, and despite the fact that the juvenile’s law stipulates that the maximum penalty for a minor is a 10 years prison sentence, he remains imprisoned.
In addition to those above, many young persons turned themselves, but instead of being treated kindly as promised, they were put incommunicado, and some were sentenced for many years on accusations of a type that is neither dangerous nor violent.
:Conclusion
The European Saudi Organization for Human Rights, views that torture, mistreatment, and the consequent sentencing to death against persons who turned themselves in, trusting in promises of amnesty, reveals an essential reason for the lack of trust with the security and judicial system in Saudi Arabia. The organisation also views that these cases are typical of the ways that the Saudi authorities deal with detainees, and that torture has been wide spread and not limited by neither international conventions nor domestic promises.
ESOHR additionally views that the Saudi treatment of detainees confirms that the ratification of The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was conjoined with its white-washing in the face of the international community, and that it did not help in protecting people from torture.
ESOHR also points out that in the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, it is not possible to ignore more than 70 persons who face execution in Saudi Arabia following being subjected to a wide range of violations that amount to torture. The organisation stresses that the judicial system in Saudi Arabia failed to implement the recommendation and the articles of the international conventions that criminalise torture on the one hand, and stresses on the other hand that its repeated practices gave way to distrusting its mechanisms and its uses.