Saudi Arabia: Risk of imminent execution of death sentences in the wake of an unfair trial

The three defendants, Mr Khaled Mohammed Issa Al-Qadihi (26 years), Mr Qasim b. Ridha B. Suleyman Al-Mahdi (24 years) and Mr Ali Hassan Issa Al-Bouri (36 years), were arrested on 25 July 2004 at the Al-Haditha border post coming from Syria via Jordan. Five kilograms of hashish were discovered in the bus carrying them along with other people.

All defendants have denied being traffickers or even mere consumers of drugs in court. During their first trial date of 26 April 2006 they explained that statements in which they admitted the accusations were extracted under torture and duress. Another obvious concern is that it is clear from the judgement itself that the facts were not formally established against them and that the decision was based solely on confessions which were extracted during their interrogations.

The court, however, refused to investigate allegations of torture, and simply brought a brief on the grounds of the judgement statements made in court by the accused. It should be noted, for example, that when Mr Al-Qadihi declared having admitted the facts under duress, the judge demanded proof of this assertion!

In addition, the accused, who were detained incommunicado for long periods, never had the possibility of being assisted by lawyers at any stage of criminal proceedings.

It is in these conditions, as a result of three expeditious hearings, that a first judgement was rendered against them on 26 April 2006, by which Khaled Al-Qadihi and Qasim Al - Mahdi were sentenced to death, and Ali Hassan Al-Bouri was sentenced to 20 years in prison and 4000 lashes.

The appellate court in Riyadh (Mahkamat attam'yiz) to which the convicts addressed themselves, on 2 December 2006 (11/11/1427 H), cancelled the first judgement on the grounds that "the death penalty issued against the first two accused was subject to revision because of the low quantity of seizure and clean criminal record of those concerned. " It did not identify the absence of guarantees to a fair trial granted to the accused in the first instance but recommended "a sentence below the death penalty" and referred the case back to the Court of First Instance.

In a judgement dated 3 May 2007 (15/04/1428 H) the same judges who convicted the three men the first time around rejected the decision of the Court of Appeal. They confirmed the two death sentences while increasing Ali Hassan Al-Bouri’s 20-year sentence to the death penalty in keeping with the other two sentences issued.

Regarding the argument concerning the absence of prior criminal charges, the judges made it clear they referred to "authority guidelines which do not require their existence to justify the imposition of the death penalty."

It is therefore against the opinion of the Court of Appeal and in contradiction with their own judgement of the first instance concerning the third accused that the same court with the same composition again delivered three death sentences.

The death penalty is now enforceable and is the responsibility of the Ministry of the Interior, which establishes a schedule of executions without the prisoners or their relatives being informed of the date.

There is no doubt that the trial of the three men was unfair and that they did not receive guarantees accorded to those facing the death penalty: the defendants did not have adequate legal assistance at all stages of the proceedings, the two levels of jurisdiction was not respected since the court of first instance did not heed the decision of the appellate court, and finally, the appellate court felt obliged return the same case before the same court composed of the same judges.

In Saudi Arabia, dozens of people were sentenced to death following unfair trials and in contradiction with its own internal laws.