In February 2020, the Specialized Criminal Court sentenced five male and one female detainees, to varying sentences ranging between 8 and 17 years in prison, after the Public Prosecution had demanded the death penalty against five of them.
According to domestic information, the detainee Israa Al-Ghomgham was sentenced to 8 years and her husband Musa Al-Hashem to 17 years. Ali Al-Oweisheer was sentenced to 10 years, Khaled Al-Ghanim 13 years, Ahmed Al-Matroud 15 years, and Mojtaba Al-Muzain 8 years.
The Saudi government arrested the six activists in 2015, and the Public Prosecutor’s Office requested execution for five of them in August 2018, nearly 33 months after their arrest. The six detainees faced identical charges, including participating in a funeral, organizing demonstrations, and communicating with opponents.
In October 2018, UN experts issued a statement expressing their deep concern over the trial of Al-Ghomgham and the rest of the activists in the Specialized Criminal Court on Terrorism, which lacks the most basic legal rules.
They stressed the significance of not using measures aimed at combating terrorism to suppress or reduce human rights. They emphasized that human rights activities should not be confused with terrorism.
In January 2019, and after four sessions before the court, the Public Prosecutor changed the request for the execution against the activist Israa Al-Ghomgham after facing significant human rights and media pressure. However, the request for the execution against the four activists was kept despite the fact that all detainees faced similar charges.
After six years of detention, in light of the lack of justice in the trials, and despite the detainees’ assertion that they were forced to sign the confessions, the Specialized Criminal Court sentenced the detainees to varying sentences ranging between 8 years to 17 years in prison.
ESOHR denounces these rulings, as well as their arbitrary detention. ESOHR believes that the varying rulings against the detainees, despite the similarity of charges to a large extent, confirms that there are no reasonable standards in the judiciary, and that it is subject to moodiness and absurdity. An official statement issued in early February 2020 included an explicit indication that there is (individualism in the issuance of judgments), and the verdict against Israa and the rest is an affirmation of the confusion of the judicial system in Saudi Arabia.