Saudi Arabia urged not to paralyze man as retribution punishment
By the CNN Wire Staff
August 21, 2010 4:18 a.m. EDT
(CNN) -- Amnesty International on Friday urged Saudi Arabian authorities not to paralyze a man as punishment for his having paralyzed someone else, allegedly during a fight.
The Saudi newspaper Okaz reported that the judge in the case had sent letters to several hospitals in Saudi Arabia asking if they could sever a man's spinal cord, as the man he allegedly stabbed had requested and, under sharia law, was his right to seek.
But such a punishment would amount "to nothing less than torture," said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, acting director of the organization's Middle East and North Africa Programme. "While those guilty of a crime should be held accountable, intentionally paralyzing a man in this way would constitute torture, and be a breach of its international human rights obligations."
The paralyzed man, 22-year-old Abdul-Aziz al-Mitairy, told Okaz that the accused stabbed him in the back with a large knife during a fight more than two years ago. "The accused confessed to the crime in front of police, resulting in a general sentence of seven months," he told the newspaper.
Originally posted by zeeblebot http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/08/20/saudi.arabia.paralysis/?hpt=T2
Saudi Arabia urged not to paralyze man as retribution punishment
By the CNN Wire Staff
August 21, 2010 4:18 a.m. EDT
(CNN) -- Amnesty International on Friday urged Saudi Arabian authorities not to paralyze a man as punishment for his having paralyzed someone else, allegedly during a ...[text shortened]... police, resulting in a general sentence of seven months," he told the newspaper.
...
A Saudi court passing sentence (by Saudi Law) on a Saudi man convicted of a crime (under Saudi Law) against a Saudi citizen in Saudi ? OUTRAGEOUS
Originally posted by wolfgang59 A Saudi court passing sentence (by Saudi Law) on a Saudi man convicted of a crime (under Saudi Law) against a Saudi citizen in Saudi ? OUTRAGEOUS
Originally posted by phil3000 Do they subscribe to international human rights ?
Clearly their perspective on punishment is hard to come to terms with, but one 'human right' evident here is a seemingly very stringent 'Right NOT to be stabbed in the back with a large knife', even during a fight. That, as far as I know, has a certain international ring to it.
Originally posted by FMF Clearly their perspective on punishment is hard to come to terms with, but one 'human right' evident here is a seemingly very stringent 'Right NOT to be stabbed in the back with a large knife', even during a fight. That, as far as I know, has a certain international ring to it.
From a Western perspective, one of the most alien things about Islamic jurisprudence is that crimes of violence are treated as private acts against specific individuals, so that the victim (or family of the victim) has a say in the appropriate punishment (and, indeed, could in theory forgive the criminal and leave him unpunished). Sexual transgressions, on the other hand, are treated as crimes against God and thus punished harshly and inflexibly, regardless of issues of consent and even in the absence of harmful consequences.
Originally posted by phil3000 Do they subscribe to international human rights ?
I dont know and clearly this is unacceptable to the majority of the world.
However it is no more shocking than so called enlightened countries still having a death penalty (and I note in recent threads that this seems supported by more than a few here)
Originally posted by Teinosuke From a Western perspective, one of the most alien things about Islamic jurisprudence is that crimes of violence are treated as private acts against specific individuals, so that the victim (or family of the victim) has a say in the appropriate punishment (and, indeed, could in theory forgive the criminal and leave him unpunished). Sexual transgressions, on ...[text shortened]... and inflexibly, regardless of issues of consent and even in the absence of harmful consequences.
It's not completely "alien"; in the US it's common for the crime victims and/or their families to be allowed to make statements at sentencing usually asking for enhanced punishment of the wrongdoers.
Originally posted by no1marauder It's not completely "alien"; in the US it's common for the crime victims and/or their families to be allowed to make statements at sentencing usually asking for enhanced punishment of the wrongdoers.
That's interesting - I can't swear to it, but I don't think that happens in the UK. However, what I meant by "alien" was the situation outlined in the post as a whole: the fact that sexual misdemeanours are treated as more serious, on a societal level, than crimes of violence.
Originally posted by no1marauder It's not completely "alien"; in the US it's common for the crime victims and/or their families to be allowed to make statements at sentencing usually asking for enhanced punishment of the wrongdoers.
that had to be legislated in some places, and even then it's spottily permitted. you got to figure that the DA isn't going to want another wild card in the bunch, risk of mistrial, etc.
Originally posted by wolfgang59 I think it was Jasper Carrot (British comedian) in the 70s who arrived in US after a long flight and told waiting agent he was "dying for a fag"
"... two countries separated by a common language" GBS
my (East) Indian friend, shortly after arriving in the US and residing in the dorms, shocked his American roommate by asking for a "rubber". (it was a conservative region!)
Originally posted by wolfgang59 A Saudi court passing sentence (by Saudi Law) on a Saudi man convicted of a crime (under Saudi Law) against a Saudi citizen in Saudi ? OUTRAGEOUS
Is this your reaction to everything ? As long as something doesn't directly affect a person he has no right to have an opinion on it ?
eye for eye, spine for spine
22 Aug '10 04:50
Back to Top