Date: Sunday, January 3, 2010

Subject : The unlawful prolong arrest of two activists, Mohammed Al-Otaibi and Khalid Alomair, for their intention to participate in a public sit-in is a glaring evidence that the Interior Ministry’s oppressive policy is the insidious source of terrorism.

To: The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, King Abdullah Bin Abdullaziz Al-Saud.

A year has passed since the arrest of the two activists: Mohammed Al-Otaibi and Khalid Alomair, the unlawful arrest took place on January 1, 2009 for their intent to express natural rights in a civil and peaceful manner by participating in a public sit-in to protest then the atrocities committed by the Israeli Army in Gaza. Since their arrest, the two activists have been deprived of their civil rights as guaranteed by the Criminal Procedure Law: they have no access to services of attorneys, the Public Persecution and Investigation Commission doesn’t conduct the interrogations, and they have been jailed without a fair court ruling.

We have received confirmed information that they have been subjected to severe physical and psychological tortures; hence, they are incarcerated in a maximum-security prison with drug dealers and other common criminals. There is, too, unconfirmed report that the Public Prosecution Commission declared them innocent and ordered their immediate release seven months ago, but the arresting authority refused to comply.

Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques,

The Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association ensures that the two activists are civil-right advocates and not merely two individuals who suffer from blatant injustice for the following reasons:

1. The detention of the two activists is considered unlawful arrest according to the rules of international law, multilateral conventions and Islamic jurisprudence. In fact, we believe that the two activists haven’t committed any wrong doing except to express their natural rights openly, by showing their resentments to these atrocities inflicted on innocents Palestinians. Hence, what they intended to do is considered within the right of freedom of expression guaranteed by law.

2. The Saudi local laws, as well as in International conventions ratified by the Saudi government, clearly maintain individuals’ rights to freedom of expressions, participate in public rallies, take part in public sit-ins, and other forms of peaceful expressions. For instance, article 8 of the Saudi Basic Law of Governance states that:” Government in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is based on the premise of justice, consultation, and equality in accordance with the Islamic Shari’ah.” However, how we can attain justice and consultation if civil movements are suppressed. Moreover, article 26 of the Basic Law states:” The state protects human rights in accordance with the Islamic Shari’ah.” But, where are the applications of genuine Islamic teachings that guarantee the freedom of expression. Unfortunately, Saudi Arabia is probably the only place on earth we can think of that confiscates the people’s rights for freedom of expression, which causes public discontents and may lead to violent protests against the political regime.

3. The Interior Ministry not only refused to grant permission for a public sit-in, but it also incriminated and imprisoned activists who intended to do so. Let us go back to the Saudi laws, article 38 of the Saudi Basic Law of Governance states: “Penalties shall be personal and there shall be no crime or penalty except in accordance with the Shari’ah or organizational law. There shall be no punishment except for acts committed subsequent to the coming into force of the organizational law.” Furthermore, article 2 of the Criminal Procedural Law states: “No person shall be arrested, searched, detained, or imprisoned except cases provided by law. Detention or imprisonment shall be carried out only in places designated for such purposes and shall be for the period prescribed by the competent authority. An arrested person shall not by subjected to any bodily or moral harm. Similarly, he shall not be subjected to any torture or degrading treatment.” Article 3 of the same law sates: “No penal punishment shall be imposed on any person except in connection with a forbidden and punishable act, whether under Shari’ah principle or under the statutory laws, and after he has been convicted pursuant to a final judgment rendered after a trial conducted in accordance with Shari’ah principles.” Hence, where is a legal article that explicitly or implicitly considers public rallies and sit-ins crimes?

4. The Saudi government’s announced policy to honor its commitment to international conventions. The Saudi Basic Law of Governance, article 81, states that: “The implementation of this law will not prejudice the treaties and agreements signed by the kingdom of Saudi Arabia with international bodies and organizations.” The Saudi government signed and ratified several international conventions and agreements that guarantee human, civil, and political rights; especially the rights to participate in rallies and sit-ins. For instance, Saudi Arabia signed and ratified Arab Charter on Human Rights, which declares in its 24th article that: “All citizens have the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.” Article 32 of the charter states: “The present charter guarantees the right to information and to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the right to seek, receive, and impart ideas through any medium, regardless of geographical boundries.” Hence, the state is compelled to harmonize its domestic laws in accordance with ratified international conventions, how would we then explain the stark conflict of local laws to international conventions and its clear commitments before the United Nations in general, and the Human Right Council in particular. These systematic and continuous human right violations cast serious doubts on Saudi Arabia’s intention and its membership in the council; it could be seen as an attempt to cover up its flagrant abuses of human rights in the country.

5. Let us suppose that the arrest of the two activists, Mohammed Al-Otaibi and Khalid Alomair, is lawful, but the Saudi Criminal Procedure Law States that the precautionary detention must not exceed six months then the accused is either set free or taken to court for trail. Although this law is not fair according to international justice standard as illustrated in international conventions, but we asked the government to adhere to the rule of law. In addition, Islamic scholars indicated that the accused shouldn’t be jailed more than one month.

6. Even if we assume that public rallies and sit-ins are crimes in every law, but should the jail-time penalty exceed a week or a month?

In conclusion, and according to the aforementioned arguments, the Saudi Civil and Political Association asks your immediate intervention to do the following actions:

1. To bring justice to the two activists, Mohammed Al-Otaibi and Khalid Alomair, by setting them free immediately because their arrest is blatantly unlawful, they have broken no laws and they are only practicing their natural rights in peaceful expressions.

2. Justice must be served by compensating them and their families for the sufferings they endured.

3. Protecting them from any potential conspiracy by the oppressive authority which may fabricate false accusations that could justify their arrest and smear their magnificent civil struggle.

4. To investigate the facts about their arrest, verify alleged cases of human right abuses, and bring those involved in tortures to justice.

Respectfully,

The Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association
ACPRA