|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
LAWYER REPRESENTATION NOT REQUIRED UNDER SHARIAH LAW FOR MINOR CONDEMNED TO DIE SAYS ARAB NEWSBy Walter JayawardhanaUnder a Shariah Court constituted under Islamic jurisprudence attorney
representation is not necessary said Arab News, Saudi Arabias
biggest selling English language newspaper referring to a verdict delivered
by three judges of such a court to behead a minor Muslim girl Rizana
Nafeek from Sri Lanka accused of murder. She was found guilty by a panel of three Shariah judges on June
16 without legal representation, which is not required under Shariah
law, said an item written by Sarah Abdullah & Mohammed Rasooldeen
in July 17th datelined item of the newspaper from Jeddah. Human rights organizations have been critical of not providing legal
representations for the girl and delivering a verdict based on a coerced
confession under duress obtained by the Saudi Arabian Police and obtaining
her signature to a document containing the alleged confession written
in Arabic , a language she did not understand . The Arabic News newspaper did not comment on the other criticism. The newspaper said the Sri Lankan Embassy hired law firm was able to
file an appeal against the verdict, allowed under the Saudi Arabian
law, one day before the deadline for an appeal and it had been not done,
she would have been beheaded imminently. The initial payment for the
law firm,Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari, 50,000 Saudi Riyals, was paid by the
Asian Human Rights Commission, based in Hong Kong. The appeal was won on Sunday(July 15), a day before the deadline
to appeal. Had the deadline been broken, Nafeek would have faced the
imminent prospect of public beheading, the Arab News said. The report further said, The lawyers are filing the appeal and
claiming that the case is accidental death, which would take execution
off the table and leave the penalty a matter of paying blood money.
The lawyer was permitted by prison authorities on Saturday( July 14)
to visit the Dawadami jailhouse and meet with Nafeek for the purpose
of escorting her to a notary public in order to acquire a power of attorney. Paying blood money to the family of the deceased is customary under
Muslim law in many Middle Eastern countries. In this case neither the
accused girl or her parents who are planning to fly to Saudi Arabia
at the expense of the Sri Lanka government to plea for condemned girl
Friday July 20, certainly cannot afford to pay blood money to anybody.
The girls father is a woodcutter and the whole family have claimed
to be living in abject poverty in a mud hut without basic amenities
like a toilet or a well for drinking water in the war racked and impoverished
Eastern Province of Sri Lanka. The Arab News quoting the Muslim Deputy Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka
Hussein Bhaila said, We respect the laws of the host country and
accordingly we have been following the legal procedures to save this
girl from the gallows. The newspaper added quoting Bhaila, who is planning to fly with the
girls parents to Saudi Arabia, as saying We will also try
other avenues to save Rizanas life by appealing for pardon on
humanitarian grounds, referring to an appeal for clemency by the
childs family. The newspaper said , Under Shariah law the family( of the deceased)
can forfeit their private right to see justice by the sword, usually
in exchange for blood money. In an earlier issue of the newspaper, in an item datelined November
15, 2005 the Arab News had this to say on blood money : Pardoning
killers in murder cases has become a multimillion-riyal business. According
to Al-Watan, profit is now the motive of forgiveness. It is called blood
money, and the families of some victims are cashing in, demanding sums
beyond the reach of all but the very rich. Last year alone, more than
SR40 million was paid to pardon eight people. The newspaper also
called it legal extortion and is against the tenets of Islam In this particular case, after the three Shariah judges convicted the
Sri Lankan girl, Naif Jiziyan Khalafal Otaibi, the father of the child
and Nafeeks Saudi sponsor, refused to give up his private right
to see Nafeek executed making the girl go to the executioner to be beheaded.
Bhaila is planning to make the parents appeal to him for a reconsideration
of his decision. Whether he would agree and if he agreed whether he
would demand blood money are two issues still with big question marks. Since no interpreter was provided, by the three Shariah judges, during
the court case , she was unable to tell them that she was actually 17
years old at the time of the death of the child, and her confession
that she killed the infant was obtained under coercion by the Saudi
Arabian police who are notorious for such acts. Joined as a house maid
at the residence of her employer , she was also additionally given the
duty of baby sitting for a four months old infant without any instructions
or training. According to the Asian Human Rights Commission she panicked
when the baby chocked on milk and accidentally died during bottle feeding
after which the parents accused her of murdering the baby. The police
forced her to sign the confession admitting strangulation on which the
judges delivered the verdict. |
||||||||||||
|
Disclaimer: The comments contained
within this website are personal reflection only and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the LankaWeb. LankaWeb.com offers the contents
of this website without charge, but does not necessarily endorse the
views and opinions expressed within. Neither the LankaWeb nor the individual
authors of any material on this Web site accept responsibility for any
loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which
you may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of your use of or
reliance on information contained on or accessed through this Web site.
Copyright
© 1997-2004 www.lankaweb.Com
Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved. |