The official Saudi Human Rights Commission reiterated the government's narratives in response to questions and criticisms of international bodies regarding its practice of the death penalty.
On April 28, 20222 the Human Rights Commission sent its response to questions posed by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions as an introduction and gathering information on the circumstances surrounding the imposition and implementation of the death penalty, and the impact of the death penalty on individuals sentenced to death, members of their families and other individuals concerned.
The Special Rapporteur addressed questions to relevant governments and actors, including human rights organizations.
The questions addressed by the Special Rapporteur to States and stakeholders are:
- How many individuals are facing the death penalty and how many are sentenced to death with details on gender, age, nationality, ethnicity, etc.?
- How the applying of the death penalty compatibility with international rules and standards, especially in terms of ensuring a fair trial in all criminal stages?
- Provide detailed information on the conditions of detention of prisoners on death row, including family visits and other relevant circumstances?
- What support is provided to children and other family members of people sentenced to death or executed?
- Has any study or evaluation been conducted in your country of the effect of the death penalty on prison officers, torturers and others involved in executions?
- In the period prior to execution, what type of information is provided to individuals sentenced to death, their families and their legal representatives, and what are the arrangements in place prior to execution?
- Were there cases that challenged the legality of the method of execution, and did this lead to a change in the methods of execution or any related practice?
- How are do you deal with the bodies and what are the procedures in place for burial?
The official human rights commission responded to the rapporteur’s questions in a paper that included a listing of the laws and regulations that claim to protect the human rights of individuals facing the death penalty, and although the special rapporteur’s questions were specific and precise, and demanded clear information, the commission replied with a general response without details or clear answers .
The European Saudi Organization for human rights refutes the responses of the Human Rights Commission:
Saudi response: The death penalty in Saudi Arabia is imposed only on the most serious crimes and in accordance with a legislative text that is issued on a decisive basis or clear evidence by a final judgment issued by a competent court and after fulfilling all legal guarantees, including access to legal aid. The judgment is issued by the Court of First Instance and is subject to appeal and then to review by the Supreme Court. Thus, 13 judges are considering the rulings.
Documentation by ESOHR confirms that Saudi Arabia uses the death penalty against individuals facing charges that include exercising legitimate rights, such as participating in demonstrations and expressing opinion. In addition, Saudi Arabia has executed hundreds of individuals on drug-related charges despite the fact that these charges are not considered among the most serious in international law. The Human Rights Commission said that Saudi Arabia has suspended death sentences for drug crimes, but the laws have not been amended, and many detainees are still facing execution on similar charges. The Human Rights Commission praises the number of judges working to pass the verdict, but the reality confirms the lack of justice and independence in the Saudi judicial system, and all judicial authorities are linked to the king and the crown prince, in the absence of any means to hold the torturers and violators accountable.
Saudi response: Article 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the accused may request the assistance of a legal representative or a lawyer to defend him during the investigation and trial. Article 70 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the investigator may not: separate the accused from his legal representative during the investigation, nor may a lawyer or legal representative interfere in the investigation. The legal representative or the lawyer may deliver the investigator a written note of his observations, and the investigator shall attach this note to the case file.
ESOHRs' documentation of many cases shows that the Saudi government denies individuals their right to a lawyer or to communicate with the outside world. Saudi Arabia justifies to itself the violation of the individual’s right to communicate and seek assistance during the investigation with the exceptions of the terrorism law. The monitoring confirms that the violations affect detainees on various charges, including criminal charges, as the minor Abdullah al-Hwaiti was denied access to a lawyer and from communicating with a legal representative or his family during investigation period. In addition, in many cases, detainees are deprived of their right to obtain investigation papers, and they are tampered with. The detainee Saud al-Faraj repeatedly demanded his right to review investigation papers, but his request was refused. In addition, the Saudi authorities put obstacles in front of lawyers to play their role, as the documentation confirms that Saudi Arabia prevents them from adequately accessing information and papers to defend the accused.
Saudi response: Article 139 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the accused must appear personally before the trial. In the event that the accused cannot appoint a lawyer, he may ask the court to appoint one to defend him.
The documentation of ESOHR confirms that the Saudi government deprives the detainee of his right to communicate with a lawyer from the moment of arrest and during the investigation period. After the trial begins, a lawyer is appointed, but the Saudi government does not respond to the lawyer’s requests, including documents and papers related to the case, such as investigation minutes, records and medical reports, and deprives him of his right to meet with the attorney at any time, and therefore the lawyer is used in a formal way.
Saudi response: With regard to the effect of the death penalty on family members, including children, the Prisoners' Welfare Committee was established by the Council of Ministers and aims to take action.. With regard to children of parents who face the death penalty, the Child Protection Law includes provisions to protect every person under the age of 18 by facing abuse and neglect that he may have been exposed to, and the executive regulations stipulate that in the absence of the child's parents due to death, or any other reasons the competent authorities shall take all necessary measures and procedures to protect this child from the deviation that exposes him to danger.
The Saudi government does not provide any kind of support to the families of those sentenced to death. In a number of cases, the government denied families their right to family visits. In addition, the Saudi government restricts the families of people who are currently facing the death penalty, as it prevents children from them and the rest of the family from traveling, including the children of Sheikh Salman al-Awda. In addition, ESOHR did not monitor any kind of support for children who lose one of their breadwinners after execution.
In addition, the Saudi government does not inform the families about the time of execution. According to the organization's monitoring of many cases, the sentence is executed in a sudden manner and the family receives news from the official media.
In addition, the commission did not address the issue of minors facing the death penalty, especially those facing charges related to expressing opinion, as Saudi Arabia continues to threaten the lives of at least 7 minors.
Saudi response: Regarding methods of implementation, including the safeguards in place for the prevention of physical pain and suffering. Treatment of the bodies of the convicts Article 160 of the Executive Regulations of the Criminal Procedures Law states that “the convict shall be brought to the place of execution without violence or any harm.” The law also stipulates that the death penalty is carried out using the tool stipulated in the law. If nothing is rejected in the judgment, by any means that achieves the goal, and it is not transferred from the place of execution except after confirming his death based on a report from a specialized doctor. After the execution of the death penalty, the competent authority must prepare and bury the person who was executed. ..
The official Human Rights Commission did not respond to the Special Rapporteur's question about the implementation, nor did it address the fate of the body. Since 2016, Saudi Arabia has detained 132 bodies, according to the European-Saudi Organization for Human Rights, and in addition to depriving families of their right to farewell and burial, or at least to know the place of burial, they has been subjected to many pressures when demanding the bodies or the belongings of the victim from among the prisoners. Families are also informed that the bodies are being buried in "Muslim cemeteries" without any further information.
In addition, families have been threatened because of accepting condolences in homes and public places, and in the base of opening groups on social media to accept condolences. According to the information, some families of the victims were forced to sign pledges not to demand to know the fate of the bodies or to talk about the cases.
The European Saudi Organization for Human Rights believes that the refutation of the responses to the Special Rapporteur's questions shows the lack of credibility of the official Human Rights Commission and its clear usage by the Saudi government in the cases of whitewashing. The repetition of legal articles without accurate information also indicates that the commission is trying to appear to deal with international bodies and interact with the letters and questions of the special rapporteurs, but in fact it is repeating the articles without factual information. ESOHR points out that the duplicate and unrealistic information is also an attempt to conceal the facts regarding what is exposed to the death row and their families.