Saudi Arabia criminalizes ‘terrorists’ defaming state’s reputation, disturbing order
Actions that threaten Saudi Arabia’s unity, disturb public order, or defame the reputation of the state or the king – will be considered acts of terrorism under a new counterterrorism law which has come into force in the gulf kingdom.
The new legislature was ratified by King Abdullah on Sunday after being approved by the Cabinet in December, following the initial proposal by the Interior Ministry and advisory Shura Council.
It defines terrorism as “any act carried out by an offender …
intended to disturb the public order…to shake the security of
society… stability of the state… expose its national unity to
danger… suspend the basic law of governance or some of its
articles,” according to its text as cited by Human Rights
Watch (HRW).
Terrorists can also be considered those individuals who
“insult the reputation of the state or its position… inflict
damage upon one of its public utilities or its natural
resources,” or those who attempt to force “governmental authority
to carry out or prevent it from carrying out an action, or to
threaten to carry out acts that lead to the named purposes or
incite [these acts].”
The legislation, made up of 40 clauses, allows the security
forces to arrest and detain suspects for up to six months with
the possibility to extend the confinement for another six months.
Suspects are allowed to be held incommunicado for 90 days without
the presence of their lawyer during the initial questioning.
Internet surveillance and phone tracking are also allowed under
the new legislature, as well as the right for the security
services to raid the homes of suspected terrorists, without prior
approval from a judge. People suspected of financing terrorist
activities could also be prosecuted.
The interior minister, rather than any judge, is empowered to
suspend sentences or drop charges and release a person on trial.
When the legislature was approved in December, HRW lashed out
against the Kingdom’s strive to limit freedom of speech and
criticized the monarchy over its very vague definition of
terrorism.
“Vague and overbroad legal provisions cannot be the basis for
overriding a broad array of fundamental rights,” HRW said in
a statement in December. “Saudi Arabia’s denial of the rights
to participate in public affairs, and freedom of religion,
peaceful assembly, association, and expression, as well as its
systematic discrimination against women greatly exceed any notion
of justifiable restrictions.”
Activists are worried that the law will first of all be applied
to silence the liberal opposition in the country. Saudi activist
Abdulaziz Al Shubaily from the Saudi Association for Civil and
Political Rights (HASEM) described the law as a
“catastrophe”.
“If I call for the release of someone from jail for being
held longer than their sentence, I can be tried for “asking the
state to take action,” Shubaily said. “When I call for a
constitutional monarchy, I can now be charged with terrorism.”
“They characterize you as a terrorist because you ask the
kingdom to do something it does not want to do,” he added.
HRW researcher Adam Coogle said, that the new law is
“draconian in spirit and letter, and there is every reason to
fear that the authorities will easily and eagerly use it against
peaceful dissidents.”
Saudi women who are seen driving can now be accused of disturbing
public order for defying a driving ban imposed on females and
face punishment under a new law. In October last year, several
images emerged online of women getting in cars and going around
the city as part of a unified protest.
