by Yesim Usluca
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — The United Nations demanded that Saudi Arabia end “severe” discrimination against girls and abolish laws which allow the stoning, amputation, flogging and execution of children.

On Friday, October 7^th, the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child issued its review of Saudi Arabia’s record of compliance with the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. The report declared that in Saudi Arabia, children over fifteen years old are tried as adults and can be executed after “trials falling short of guarantees of due process and fair trial.” The U.N. Convention, however, defines “children” as individuals under eighteen. The report further stated that Saudi Arabia continues to “sentence to death, and execute, persons for offenses that they allegedly committed when they were under the age of eighteen.”

The Committee consists of eighteen independent experts who monitor the implementation of the U.N. Convention. It highlighted several cases where minors had been sentenced to death, including at least four of the 47 people executed in January 2016, who were under eighteen when they were sentenced to death. It determined that a major problem in the country is that the decision of whether an individual will be treated as an adult is left to judges.

Mr. Jorge Cardona, who is a Committee member, stated that the possibility of imposing the death penalty on children as well as the possibility of sanctions and mistreatment, including harsh punishments such as torture and being flogged, are very serious concerns. The Committee Chair, Mr. Benyam Mezmur, indicated that it had consistently received reports of the death penalty being applied to offenses committed by individuals under the age of eighteen. Mr. Mezmur noted that there are only five countries in the world, including Saudi Arabia, that the U.N. engages on this issue with. He identified the other countries as Iran, Pakistan, China and the Maldives.

Mr. Bandar Bin Mohammed Al-Aiban, who is the Head of the Saudi delegate to the Committee and Chairman of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, indicated that Islamic law is above all laws and treaties, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child. He insisted, however, that the kingdom had the political will to protect children’s rights. The Saudi Arabian government has not issued a statement in response to the conclusions set forth in the U.N. report.

For more information, please see:

Daily Mail—UN watchdog demands Saudis stop child executions—7 October 2016

Reuters—U.N. body calls on Saudi Arabia to end laws allowing executions of children—7 October 2016

International Business Times—UN hits out at Saudi Arabia over stoning, amputation and execution of children—7 October 2016

Middle East Monitor—UN, Saudi disagree over abuse of children—7 October 2016

by Yesim Usluca
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

CAIRO, Egypt — A member of the Egyptian parliament’s Human Rights Committee, Ilhami Agina, declared that females seeking to attend university should be required to undergo a mandatory “virginity test” before being admitted.

In an interview with an Egyptian newspaper, Mr. Agina stated the parliament has to check the medical examination of “any girl who enters university” in order to “prove that she is a Miss.” He further commented that each female must present an “official document” upon university admission, which states that “she is a Miss.”

Mr. Agina defended his comments by stating that the virginity tests would help reduce the number of Urfi marriages in the country, and further commented that “no one should be upset by this decision.” Urfi marriages, also known as customary marriages, are viewed as a religiously sanctioned way of having premarital sex, which is a taboo in the conservative country. In Egypt, a young woman’s virginity is widely seen as a matter of family honor, and its loss could prevent her from getting married. Accordingly, Mr. Agina indicated that a woman who fails the virginity test will have her parents notified immediately in an attempt to prevent couples from entering into pre-marital relations.

National outrage broke out after Mr. Agina’s use of “Miss” was interpreted by Egyptians as referring to a woman who is a virgin. Egypt’s National Council for Women is set to file a report with the country’s top attorney over Mr. Agina’s “offensive remarks about women in Egypt and abroad.” The Council will also be submitting a complaint to the speaker of parliament, demanding Mr. Agina’s expulsion from parliament and seeking a criminal investigation into his actions and comments. In addition to his statements about medical exams for university admission, the council is also referencing previous remarks in which Mr. Agina stated that the practice of female genital mutilation was needed in Egypt to restrict women’s sexuality and counterbalance male impotence.

Ms. Amna Nosseir, an Egyptian female parliament member and Islamic Law professor, stated that “Agina’s remarks represent an insult to women and public manners in Egypt.” Mr. Agina, however, has stated that his remarks had been misinterpreted and that he only made a “suggestion,” not a “demand” in response to a question regarding the government’s role in ending customary marriages.

For more information, please see:

AhramOnline—Egypt’s women’s council to file complaint against MP who called for college virginity tests—1 October 2016

Al Arabiya—Egyptian lawmaker’s call for virginity tests draws fire—2 October 2016

Washington Post—Egyptian lawmaker says women should prove they are virgins to go to college—01 October 2016

Daily Mail—Egyptian MP calls for universities to perform virginity tests on female students – and tell their parents if they fail—30 September 2016

by Yesim Usluca
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced on Wednesday, September 28^th that he is recommending the country’s three-month state of emergency be extended.

Under President Erdogan’s direction, the National Security Council convened for an approximately six-hour meeting on September 28^th in Ankara. It recommended that the country’s state of emergency be extended beyond its initial three-month period for an additional period of at least ninety days.

The statement issued after the meeting indicated “it has been agreed to recommend an extension of the state of emergency in order to ensure the continuity of the effective implementation of the measures aiming at protecting our democracy, the rule of law and the rights and freedoms of our citizens.”

President Erdogan declared that the country’s fight with terrorism requires more time because it is so “deep” as to not be capable of resolution within three months. He further noted that the country is competing against time and “needs time to be cleared of these terror organizations’ extensions.”

The Turkish Constitution holds that a state of emergency can be declared for a maximum period of six months. To enact a state of emergency, the government must see serious indications of widespread violence that could interfere with Turkey’s democratic environment or its citizens’ basic rights and freedoms as established by the constitution.

The opposition Nationalist Movement Party expressed its support for an extension of the state of emergency. It declared that the fight against those behind the coup attempt was continuing at all levels and that this was “natural and right.” The Party’s leader, Mr. Devlet Bahceli, stated that the “deep cleaning” was continuing and that it would be “overly optimistic to expect it to end in short period.”

Turkish authorities also ordered the closure of at least twelve television states and eleven radio stations which were owned, operated or linked to Kurdish individuals or members of the Alevi religious minority. The stations were shuttered on charges of spreading “terrorist propaganda.”

The Turkish government had declared a three-month state of emergency on July 20^th following the failed coup attempt, which led to the deaths of over 240 individuals and injured approximately 2,200. At the time, President Erdogan had announced that the three-month state of emergency would enable authorities to act quickly against those responsible for the coup.

The aftermath of the coup attempt and state of emergency has attracted international criticism from international and human rights organizations due to the dismissal of thousands of teachers and court officials, as well as the detention of thousands of police officers and chiefs, journalists and opposition leaders. U.S. State Department spokesperson Elizabeth Trudeau had urged “Turkey to abide by its constitutional commitment to fundamental principles such as freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, due process, judicial independence.” She further went on to declare “these are key parts of any healthy democracy and a key part of Turkey’s own constitution of any healthy democracy.” and a key part of Turkey’s own constitution.”

For more information, please see:

International Press Institute— Turkey shutters at least 20 more TV, radio stations—30 September 2016

NPR—Turkey’s President Recommends Extending State Of Emergency—29 September 2016

Anadolu Agency—Turkey’s security council recommends extending emergency—29 September 2016

Washington Post—To no one’s surprise, Erdogan backs extending Turkey’s state of emergency—29 September 2016

Reuters—Turkey security council to recommend extending state of emergency—28 September 2016

Hurriyet Daily News—State of emergency to be extended by the government—01 October 2016

 

by Yesim Usluca
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Over 14,000 women in Saudi Arabia have signed an online petition to end the country’s practice of male guardianship.

The official number of signatures on the petition is currently reported as approximately 14,000. However, there are many more signatures that were submitted anonymously due to fear of reprisal from their families or the religious police. Furthermore, approximately 2,500 women have also sent personal messages to King Salman demanding the guardianship law be abolished.

An online women’s rights movement has been building for the past few months, and became more prevalent this summer after Human Rights Watch released a report on the guardianship system. The report found that the guardianship system is “the most significant impediment to realizing women’s rights in the country.” It gave way to the hashtag #IAmMyOwnGuardian, which has become the slogan for the campaign. Activist Aziza Al-Yousef, who has been fighting the guardianship system for a decade, stated that “women should be treated as a full citizen.” Ms. Al-Yousef further noted that the petitioners “want women over 18 or 20 to be treated as adults, to be responsible for their own acts and allowed to make their own decisions.”

Ms. Al-Yousef stated that she tried to deliver the petition to the Royal Court on Monday, September 26^th. However, she was turned away and told to submit the petition by mail. Accordingly, as instructed, activists will now send the petition by mail. There has been no response to the petition by the Saudi Arabia government.

The petition is protesting a Saudi Arabia law in which women are treated as legal minors and close male relatives make important legal decisions on their behalf. The male guardian is typically a woman’s father or husband, if she is married. A widow may be required to seek permission from her son if she does not have any other male relatives of age. Alternatively, uncles and brothers can also serve as the male guardian. Under this law, women are required to obtain their male guardian’s permission to marry, travel, obtain a passport, rent property, file any legal claim, or be treated at a hospital, among other things. Furthermore, many institutions also require the guardian’s permission for a woman to pursue an education or hold a job. Many women report that their guardians extort them for money or other favors. Due to the limited recourse options available to women, some are “trapped with extortionate or abusive men.”

The Saudi Arabia government had agreed to abolish the guardianship system in 2009 as well as in 2013 in response to a review by the United Nation’s Human Rights Council. Although some reforms were instituted at the time, they did not provide basic rights to women.

For more information, please see:

The Guardian—Thousands of Saudis sign petition to end male guardianship of women—26 September 2016

ABC News—#IAmMyOwnGuardian petition to end male guardianship system kicks off in Saudi Arabia—27 September 2016

Daily Mail—Saudi petition seeks ‘full’ rights for women—27 September 2016

CNN—Saudis petition king to end male guardianship system—26 September 2016

Inquisitr—Saudi Women Take Stand Against Male Guardianship, Oppression—26 September 2016

 

by Yesim Usluca
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

KUWAIT CITY, Kuwait — Kuwaiti attorney, Adel Abdulhadi, filed a challenge against the constitutionality of the country’s DNA collection law.

In his filing, Mr. Abdulhadi argued that the DNA collection law violates “fundamental human rights and personal freedoms protected and sacred by the Kuwait constitution.” He stated that “compelling every citizen, resident and visitor to submit a DNA sample to the government is similar to forcing house searches without a warrant.” He asserted that the law means “every single person is now considered a suspect until proven innocent.” Mr. Abdulhadi further stated that the government has already started collecting DNA samples from individuals they suspect falsely claimed Kuwaiti nationality.

The DNA collection law, which was passed in July 2015, is expected to go into effect in November 2016. It is the first law of its kind around the world, and would require all Kuwait citizens, expatriates and temporary visitors to provide DNA samples for the government’s database. Furthermore, all Kuwait citizens applying for passport renewals will be required to submit DNA samples. Kuwait officials stated that the law is a security and counterterrorism measure in response to the suicide bombing at a mosque in Kuwait which killed 27 and injured hundreds of others. Officials further indicated that the law will help facilitate solving crime and terrorism cases. Mr. Abdulhadi criticized these explanations by stating “terrorism is in the mindset of the person, and you can’t minimize this by restricting the privacy of people.”

The DNA samples of over 1.3 million citizens, and 2.9 million expatriates and temporary visitors from other countries would be collected through saliva swabs or a few drops of blood. The samples would then be entered into a database and stored in a laboratory at the General Department of Criminal Evidence. Anyone who refuses to provide a sample could be fined $33,000 or sentenced to one year in prison. Furthermore, any individual who is caught faking samples could be sentenced to up to seven years in jail.

Several international organizations urged the Kuwait government to change or amend the law before it goes into effect. The European Society of Human Genetics declared that the law is a “serious assault on the right to privacy of individuals.” The Society further noted that the law will most likely result in Kuwait’s isolation from scientific research. The United Nations’ Human Rights Committee as well as the Human Rights Watch stated that the law “imposes unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on the right to privacy.” In addition, scientists and security experts criticized the law as a “huge attack on genetic privacy,” and voiced their concerns over the law while urging Kuwait to amend it.

For more information, please see:

Zawya (Thomsan Reuters)—Lawyer files challenge against constitutionality of the DNA law—22 September 2016

International Business Times—Kuwait lawyer challenges constitutionality of world’s first controversial mandatory DNA collection law—23 September 2016

Middle East Monitor—Kuwaiti lawyers challenge forced DNA sampling law—23 September 2016

New Scientist—Kuwait lawyers fight world’s first mandatory DNA sampling law—22 September 2016