By Justin Dorman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

CAIRO, Egypt – Under Mubarak, NGOs were sterilized by lengthy application processes that lasted years in which a group could not truly act for fear of having their application rejected. Under the military dictatorship, NGO staffers were targeted and arrested. Despite the 2011 uprising, Egypt again may see the day where NGOs are rendered impotent if the parliament’s latest draft law becomes implemented.

The new draft law would require any international NGO to request permission from an Egyptian committee, consisting of state security officials, before the taking of every action. This committee could reject the NGOs action as counterintuitive to Egypt’s public morals, development goals, and national unity. Furthermore, local groups who receive foreign aid would additionally require authorization by this committee to act. Marwan Abi Samra, head of the democratic governance for the United Nations in Egypt, estimates that over the past decade that ninety percent of all funding for local human rights groups has come from abroad.

Bahey al-Deeen Hassan, the head of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies explains that, “the law is an obvious bid to shift the civil working organizations from non-governmental to governmental societies.” He goes on to state that the draft proposal is “‘the worst law’ that had been drafted in the history of NGOs in Egypt.”

The Egyptian program director at the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Mohamed Zaree, feels betrayed. He says that when he was a participant in the Tahrir Square uprising, “the demands of the revolution were bread and freedom and social justice. Not bread and freedom and restricting the work of NGOs.”

The United Nations and European Union hate this law as proposed, as does the international human rights group, Human Rights Watch. The Egyptian director at Human Rights Watch, Heba Morayef, stated that the law, “haw very vague language that gives the government discretion to halt any activities that it doesn’t agree with substantively.”

While the committee may not completely reject the activities of an NGO, bureaucracy could bring the effectiveness of the NGO to a screeching halt. Gasser Abdel-Razek, the associate director at the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, believes that ultimately the NGO will “really waste a lot of [its] resources in keeping [it]self alive, rather than in contributing to whatever [it] set out to do.”

Heba Morayef conjectures that one area this law may immediately hurt is women’s rights. She believes that it is a prerogative of the Muslim Brotherhood to not grant women any more basic rights and can envision a group whose mission is to work on women’s rights being told by this special committee that women’s rights is not a priority in Egypt and that the group should find something else to do.

It is vital for a human rights group to be able to act independently of the government which it is analyzing, condemning, or seeking to benefit. This law would destroy that independence, and any likely destroy any good that an NGO could do in Egypt.

For further information, please see:

Coast Week – NGOs Bill Sparks Fears in Egypt Over Freedom Restrictions – 5 April 2013

Guardian – Human Rights Groups Fear Impact of Draft Egypt law Restricting Their Work – 5 April 2013

Egypt Independent – UN Experts Condemn Shura Council’s NGO Bill – 28 March 2013

Al Monitor – Egypt’s NGOs Face new Strictures Under Ruling Party – 14 March 2013

By Justin Dorman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia – This past week it was announced that women in Saudi Arabia would be allowed to ride bicycles and motorbikes. This was another extremely small step, for women in ultraconservative Islamic Saudi Arabia.

In order to fight unemployment, in the 1980s, British politician Norman Tebbit would advise the unemployed to “get on yer bike” and look for a job. This is far from what the religious police were intending. It would be very unlikely that they would suggest to a women to get a job, and would certainly not advocate that stance without the consent of her male relatives.

Nor is the grant for women to ride bicycles related, in any sense, to any use of bicycles as a vehicle for transportation. The impetus for the allowance was to give women some form of entertainment in which they can pass time. It would be too good to be true if this magnificent source of fun did not come without its restrictions. The religious police have stipulated that women may only ride their bicycles in recreational areas like parks, that they must be wearing full head-to-toe Islamic garb, and that they must always be accompanied by a male relative. Additionally, it was suggested that they avoid riding in places in which young men may congregate and harass such women.

Saudi Arabia’s religious police chief found this whole matter fairly comical. He stated that no one really rides bicycles in Saudi Arabia so that it was never truly considered whether or not there was actually a ban on women from riding in the first place.

It may be difficult to consider the right to ride bicycles a real freedom considering women can only do so when confined to certain areas, properly chaperoned, and properly covered; but, it can still be considered a slight progress in what might be the golden age for women in ultraconservative Saudi Arabia. Last year, Sarah Attar, a Saudi Arabian woman, became the first to be allowed to compete in the Olympics. Two years ago, King Abdullah granted women the right to vote, and to run in municipal elections starting in 2015.  Over the past year, King Abdullah also appointed thirty women to Saudi Arabia’s Shura Council.

While bicycle riding may not be very important in Saudi Arabia, we should still consider the rotation of each woman’s tire as part of a revolution.

For further information, please see:

Foreign Policy Blog – Saudi Women Might not be Allowed to Ride Bikes After all – 3 April 2013

Guardian – Saudi Women are Allowed to Cycle – but Only Around in Circles – 3 April 2013

Time – Saudi Women Can Now Ride Bicycles in Public (Kind of) – 3 April 2013

Al Jazeera – Saudi Arabia Eases ban on Women Riding Bikes – 2 April 2013

By Ali Al-Bassam
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — The Saudi Arabian Ministry of Justice sentenced 24 year old Ali al-Khawahir to paralysis from the waist down after finding him guilty of stabbing his friend in the back ten years ago.  The act resulted in his paralysis.  Al-Khawahir can avoid the punishment if he pays $270,000 in compensation to the victim.

Amnesty International condemned the sentencing, calling it an act of “retribution,” and saying  that it is “outrageous” for the Kingdom to carry out.  The rights group also said that the punishment was “tantamount to torture.”  In a statement released last Tuesday, it pleaded with Saudi Arabia to not carry out the sentence.  “Paralyzing someone as punishment for crime would be torture,” said Ann Harrison, Middle East and North Africa Deputy Director at Amnesty International.  “It is time the authorities in Saudi Arabia start respecting their international legal obligations and remove these terrible punishments from the law.”  It called the punishment an act of “qisas,” a retribution case, in which “other sentences passed have included eye gouging, tooth extraction, and death in cases of murder.”

Where the punishment of a crime demands “an eye for an eye,” a victim can demand retribution, request financial compensation for his suffering, or grant a conditional or unconditional pardon to the defendant.  When thieves are punished, they are commonly sentenced to amputation of the right hand.  When a defendant is punished for committing “highway robbery,” the punishment for such a crime is cross amputation, where the defendant’s right hand and left foot are both severed.

A spokesperson speaking on behalf of Britain’s Foreign Office said that London was “deeply concerned” by the sentence, and called it “grotesque.”  The spokesperson also said that such punishment “was prohibited under international law.”  Amnesty International also made a comment about Saudi Arabia’s potential violation of international law, saying “… the paralysis sentence would contravene the U.N. Convention against Torture to which Saudi Arabia is a state party…”

The Saudi Gazette reported that al-Khawaher has been awaiting his punishment for the last ten years.  “Ten years have passed with hundreds of sleepless nights…” said al-Khawaher’s mother.  She also said the compensation for the victim’s family had doubled but was later reduced.  Even reduced, she says that she cannot even pay a tenth of what is owed to save her son from being paralyzed.

Al-Khawahir was only 14 when he stabbed his friend in 2003.  As a result of the stabbing, he is paralyzed from the waist down.  Amnesty International claims that Saudi Arabia had made a similar sentence to another defendant in 2010, but it is unknown whether the punishment was carried out.  The Saudi Ministry of Justice denies that they even considered punishing the defendant in that case with paralysis.

For further information, please see:

Al Arabiya — An eye for an eye for a Spine? Saudi man Sentenced to Paralysis — 4 April 2013

BBC News — Saudi Paralysis Sentencing ‘Grotesque’ — 4 April 2013

The Guardian — Saudi Arabian Paralysis Sentence ‘Grotesque’, says Foreign Office — 4 April 2013

Russia Today — ‘Torture’ Punishment: Saudi Sentence man to be Paralyzed — 4 April 2013

CNN — Reported Saudi Paralysis Sentence ‘Outrageous,’ Rights Group says —  3 April 2013