In The Media
Lina Khatib
{
"authors": [
"Lina Khatib"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Gulf",
"Saudi Arabia",
"Middle East"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
The Saudi Regime May Seek Distance From ISIS, But Their Justice Systems Are Not Dissimilar
The public flogging of Raif Badawi has come at a critical time for the Kingdom, with many drawing parallels between the Islamic State’s brutality and law enforcement practices in Saudi Arabia.
By Lina Khatib
Published on Jan 19, 2015
Source: Independent
The public flogging of Raif Badawi has drawn attention to Saudi Arabia’s opaque judicial system, leading to questions about who has the power to revoke Badawi’s sentence.
Saudi Arabia’s courts are mainly sharia courts that issue sentences based on a strict, Wahhabi interpretation of Islamic law. In fact, the highest authority in the judiciary is the Grand Mufti, who is also the head of the Senior Council of Ulema (scholars of religious law), the highest religious authority in the country. While non-sharia courts also exist, they only apply to administrative cases like those dealing with commerce and labour issues. Badawi was charged with apostasy, among other charges such as undermining the regime, and his case was therefore strictly handled by the sharia court.
But the kingdom’s court system is far from consistent. Case law does not apply, leaving sentences up to the discretion of individual judges. In addition, political and tribal considerations play a role in determining the outcomes. Above all else, the King has the final say in all court judgments. On several occasions, people escaped sentences or had them revised as a result of royal discretion.Badawi’s flogging has come at a critical time for Saudi Arabia. Following the rise of jihadism in Syria, the kingdom is trying to reposition itself as a leader on counterradicalisation in the Middle East. Fearing internal instability, the Minister of the Interior, Mohamed bin Nayef, who used to oversee Saudi Arabia’s homegrown deradicalization programs, is trying to steer Saudi policy away from supporting jihadism as a way to topple the Syrian regime. The Grand Mufti has also denounced ISIS.
However, many have drawn parallels between ISIS’s brutality and law enforcement practices in Saudi Arabia, where public beheadings are still common.
The ministry of the interior is therefore under pressure to demonstrate a move towards moderation while not upsetting the country’s influential council of ulema. It is therefore justifiable that the sole avenue for Saudi Arabia to save itself from the Badawi case would be a royal pardon or at least a revision of his sentence on medical or other grounds. This would save face for the judiciary and ulema and present the kingdom in a more favorable light internationally at a time when its credibility in countering radicalization is critically at stake.
About the Author
Lina Khatib
Former Director, Middle East Center
Khatib was director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. Previously, she was the co-founding head of the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.
- Syria's Last Best Hope: The Southern Front
- The Islamic State’s Strategy: Lasting and ExpandingPaper
Lina Khatib
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- EU Integration Without Ratification?Article
Countries face several hurdles in joining the EU, including the final stage of ratifying their accession treaties. Procedural reforms and substantive adjustments could help move the process forward.
Stefan Lehne
- There Is No Shortcut for Europe in ArmeniaCommentary
Europe has an interest in supporting Armenian leader Nikol Pashinyan as he tries to make peace with neighbors and loosen ties with Russia. But it is depersonalized support in the long term, not quickfire flash, that will win the day.
Thomas de Waal
- France, Italy, and Spain Should Use Force in LebanonCommentary
Europe has been standing by while its Southern neighborhood is being redrawn by force. To establish a path to peace between Israel and Lebanon, it’s time for Europeans to get involved with hard power.
Rym Momtaz
- How to Join the EU in Three Easy StepsCommentary
Montenegro and Albania are frontrunners for EU enlargement in the Western Balkans, but they can’t just sit back and wait. To meet their 2030 accession ambitions, they must make a strong positive case.
Dimitar Bechev, Iliriana Gjoni
- Win or Lose, Orbán Has Broken Hungary’s DemocracyCommentary
Hungarians head to the polls on April 12 for an election of national and European consequence. Three different outcomes are on the cards, each with their own implications for the EU.
Zsuzsanna Szelényi
