Is It Reshoudi’s Trial Or The Grievances Court’s Trial?

The Fifth Press Release
 On the Court Proceedings of 
the Lawsuit Filed by the Legal Defense Team of, the Arbitrarily Incarcerated Former Judge and Attorney, Suliman Ibrahim Al-Reshoudi, A  Leading Human Right Activist and One of the Founders of the First Human Rights Organization in the Country (i.e., CDLR in 1993), Brought Against the Ministry of Interior Before the Fifth Administrative Circuit Court in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

(Riyadh, Saudi Arabia)

Further to our fourth press release published on August 7, 2010 about the proceedings of the case of the arbitrary arrest of several reform advocates on February 2, 2007 in the city of Jeddah, including our client, Sheikh Sulaiman Ibrahim Al-Reshoudi. A lawsuit has been filed on our client’s behalf against the Ministry of Interior (MOI)–Directorate of General Investigations (DGI)- before the fifth administrative circuit court in Riyadh on Sunday, August 16, 2009. The defense team would like to explain to those concerned the proceedings of the eight court session (announcement of verdict), held on Saturday, August 28, 2010. In that court hearing, the defense team presented a three-page document, while the representative of the MOI (DGI) did not attend the court hearing for the third consecutive time, and for the fourth time during the court sessions. MOI’s behavior indicates its mockery of the judiciary, local, international  human rights organizations, and violating the citizens’ fundamental rights.

The following points shed some light on the course of the trial:

First:  Since the basic function of the Grievances Court in the Islamic jurisprudence is to bring justice to a weak party against a strong adversary who has vast powers granted to by his official position in the political system.  Hence, the defense team and human rights activists wished the Grievances Court would take a historic stand by ordering the immediate release of a leading human rights and political reform advocate who spent more than eight and a half years in prison, including three and half years in his current prison term. The defense team, however, was surprised that the Ministry of Interior had brought Judge Reshoudi and his other twelve colleagues before unknown person in Dahban prison, without mentioning the name of the person present in front of them and without disclosing the entity to which he represents.

Second: Not only did the representative of the Ministry of Interior missed three consecutive, and a total of four, court sessions since the beginning of the trial, which clearly proves its contempt of the judiciary in a flagrant violation of King Abdullah’s repeated orders that government agencies must attend court hearings.  Furthermore, the Ministry of Interior sent an urgent secret cable to the Grievance Court  the night before, on Friday August 27, 2010, which are not seen by the court or Reshoudi’s lawyers. Instead,  the Grievances Court Chief sent a transcribed brief of the cable to the court, which states that the thirteen defendants  have been brought before a court in Jeddah.  This act by the MOI is unacceptable, deplorable, and doesn’t show any kind of respect to the judiciary. Such practices raise serious public concern about judicial independence, impartiality, and the inability of government agencies to understand that the judiciary must be an independent third authority.  Reshoudi’s lawyers and observers were looking for a historic stand that reflects the court’s  consciousness of its importance role in supporting the oppressed and deterring the aggressors, especially since the court had accepted the trial to be public and allowed the presence of local, international human rights organizations, and the international media. These steps raised optimism that the Saudi Judiciary is taking a corrective turning point that addresses its shortcomings; unfortunately, it is still unable to get rid of the shackles that continue to hinder it.

Third: Although the Ministry of Interior’s lawyer did not attend the court hearing, but its clandestine agents were present within the corridors and inside the courtroom. MOI’s agents tried to intervene in some events, such as preventing human rights organizations, the media, and activists from entering the courtroom. The Reshoudi’s lawyers, however,  refused to appear before the court unless it allows the presence of all those who came to monitor the trial; then the court responded positively to their request.

Fourth: At this court session, a representative of the National Society for Human Rights attended  the trial for the first time in response to the published appeal by the Reshoudi’s lawyers. Several individuals attended the court, including  representatives of the Non-Government Human Rights Committee, Human Rights First Society in Saudi Arabia, members of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association (ACPRA), correspondents of international news agencies, and rights activists. The Reshoudi’s legal representatives would like to this opportunity to express their deepest appreciation and thanks to those who attended the court sessions .

Fifth: The court hearing started at 1:30 PM, and attendants couldn’t find seats due to the court room small size. The presiding judge then instructed all attendants not to take photos and not to audiotape the court session. The judge then asked Reshoudi’s lawyers if there is any new development in the case, and they answered negatively, the judge then  announced that he had sent a letter to the Directorate of the General Investigations (DGI) in August 10, 2010. The judge then argued that the Ministry of Interior responded in a secret cable to the Grievances Court Chief last night, on Friday August 27 2010, stating that Suliman Al-Reshuodi and his colleagues have been brought before a competent court in Jeddah. The Grievance Court Chief then sent a letter stating a summary of the secret cable contents to the court. Reshoudi’s lawyers responded that they heard about the mock trial from the defendants’ families; based on their account, all thirteen detainees were transferred to a villa inside Dahban prison with their hands and legs shackled and they were presented before an unknown person who did not identify himself or the entity he represents. The judge-like individual then handed each defendant a list of charges against him and asked them to respond in writing in the next court session which expected to resume sometimes next month. The presiding judge then repeated his question to the defense team: “do you acknowledge that you clients have been taken to a competent court?” they answered “no”, and then Reshoudi’s legal representatives presented a three-page memorandum with five annexes to the court.

          The judge then asked for time for consultation and deliberation in order to reach a verdict and instructed attendants to leave the court room , fifteen minutes later the judge called Reshoudi’s lawyers and the audience to come back to the court room. The presiding judge  presented the lawyers a copy of the session record and asked them to sign it, then the judge pronounced the ruling : “Dismissing the case for lack of jurisdiction.”
 The judge instructed Reshoudi’s lawyers to show up in court in October 6, 2010 to receive a copy of the official ruling, and the lawyers can by then submit their possible objection and appeal. The judge then announced the end of the court session.

Sixth: The disappointing ruling sparked discontent among detainees’ families and attendants, international media reporters then started asking questions in explanation of what happened in court room due to their lack of proficiency in Arabic. All of the sudden, one of the DGI’s secret agents – as it seems – who was allegedly a member of the court staff rebuked the journalist and demanded that those who answer questions from journalists to refrain from criticizing the Ministry of Interior, forgetting that the just-held court session was held to try the Ministry of Interior, and he then asked the audience in an angry tune to leave the court building immediately.

Seventh: Human rights activists usually advice detainees’ families to file lawsuits in the  Grievances Court in order to defend their rights, but the families thought that no benefit of such actions. This ruling regrettably has proved the validity of some of what they believe.
       Nevertheless, the course of this trial demonstrated tremendous benefits, the Ministry of Interior was finally pressured to bring the defendants before a court after an extended procrastination for years and allowed them to have access to lawyer services. The trial also reinforced the right to open trials, the presence of activists, the news agencies inside the court room. It has also an important advantage, which is the demolition of “work of sovereignty” principle which usually prevents political dissidents from appearing before normal courts. The right to appear before the Grievances Court was shown by the court’s judicial committee refusal of the repeated MOI’s requests to throw out the case.

           Despite the absence of local media on such issues, the presence of the international media and human rights organizations has a significant impact in informing the public of the trial proceedings.

In conclusion, the defense team extends his warmest thanks to human rights activists, organizations, and the media for attending the court trial and writing about it. These activities certainly give hopes that there are people who are willing to sacrifice for the sake of bringing victory to the oppressed.  Our thanks and gratitude go to all those who have declared their sympathy with the defense team , and contacted the defense team to follow up the case.

The defense team for the imprisoned human rights activist, Judge Suliman Ibrahim Al-Reshoudi:

1. Attorney Abdulaziz Mohammed Al-Wahabi, Mobile:+966555188867, email: azizmw@yahoo.com.

 
2. Mohammad Fahad Al-Qahtani, mobile :+966555464345, email : mqahtani@ksarights.org.

3. Fahd Abdulaziz Al-Orani, mobile :+966502566678, email : fahadalorani@gmail.com.

4. Fowzan Mohsen Al-Harbi, mobile:+966501916774, email: fowzanm@gmail.com.

                5. Attorney Dr. Abdulaziz Abdulmohsin Al-Turky.