Saudi Arabia Grapples with Women's Right to Drive Within Existing Restrictions

SAUDI ARABIA - A common Western activity such as driving has been an issue for women in Saudi Arabia for ages. Although women over thirty have been allowed to drive, this right has been curtailed by the stringent restriction to which they are forced to adhere.

Currently, "Saudi Arabian laws" limit their freedom to drive outside of a proscribed schedule which prohibits them driving after 8:00 p.m. Also, an additional restrictive and seemingly punitive issue is that women who are driving are forbidden to wear make-up while operating the vehicle. One would presumably understand the restriction against distracted drivers using cell phones and other communication devices thus taking their attention away from the road, but the wearing of make-up does not seem to fall into this category as women are allowed to wear it in all other instances.

This matter came to the attention of the world because the consul of Saudi Arabia has put on the table for discussion the possibility of removing the time constraints, and also considering the option of allowing women older than 30-years-old to operate a vehicle during restricted hours. Though, these discussion are not open to the public, it seems that this is a growing necessity for a society that is increasingly mobile and where the use of a vehicle would greatly enhance the performance of such mundane duties such as grocery shopping, picking up children from school, etc.

Although the decision to reassess the restrictions imposed on women drivers seems precipitous, in fact women have been actively campaigning for this basic right to drive for years. The consul stated that there is the necessity to create a “female traffic department" in order to bring precise control over the matter, in case a car suffers some damage while being utilized by a woman. There are also restrictions when it comes to women interacting with men while driving. Though these discussion seem to be a recognition of the need for equal rights for women in terms of driving, the additional restriction makes us wonder if this response is a ploy to seemingly comply with women's rights group while in fact devaluing the struggle in which many women defied the laws, boldly driven their cars, and consequently suffered punishment.

Additionally, the existing restriction have resulted in a culture of families hiring drivers to transport women. But, what happens when the traditional family does not have the economic resources to hire someone? Women then are directly dependent of spouses, siblings, parents and even their children in order to accomplish their daily activities, and such restriction are unduly punitive for women who are in the lower classes. Thus, the current debate is considering the possibility that under certain conditions women might drive more days of the week during the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Restrictions regarding wearing make-up and interacting with men during the driving are not up for discussion and will likely remain in place.

According to The Associated Press, "There have been small, but increasingly bold protests by women who took to their cars in open defiance....over the past year despite the restrictions. The driving ban, which is unique in the world, was imposed because the kingdom's ultraconservative Muslim clerics say "licentiousness" will spread if women drive.”

A protest occurred last October when Saudi women drove around their neighborhoods and recorded themselves on videos which they then posted on social networks such as YouTube as a means to publicize their plight and reinforce their belief in the right to protest this unjust situation. Although there isn't a written law that limits schedules or outlines formal details on restrictions imposed on women driver, these unwritten cultural restrictions have been ubiquitously enforced, and punishments have varied between jail time or other sanctions.

In 2011 forty women protested against the driving ban and as a consequence one of them was sentenced to 10 lashes; however this barbaric punishment was subsequently overturned by the king. The revocation of this sentence can be viewed as an improvement since the situation has been discussed for years over what type of judgement should be meted out for women who break the de facto "driving ban" laws, and corporal punishment of women who are considered disobedient is actively practiced in other traditional cultures.

Since the consuls' discussion are private and there has been no indication of when an announcement of their decision will be made, women who have been demanding their right to drive continue to peacefully protest by driving despite these anachronistic traditions.

Sudan: Pregnant Woman Condemned to Death or Religious Conversion

Olivia Elswick, Contributing JournalistLast Modified: 00:13 a.m. DST, 16 May 2014

KHARTOUM, Sudan - Meriam Yehya Ibrahim, 27, has until Thursday to either denounce her Christian faith or face a death sentence.

When Ibrahim’s father, a Sudanese Muslim, abandoned her at age six, her mother, an Ethiopian Orthodox, raised her as a Christian. Ibrahim identifies herself as a Christian, but despite this she is considered by the courts to be a Muslim, as her father was.

She was reported by a family member in August 2013 and was arrested on charges of adultery. Ibrahim has been convicted by a Khartuom court for abandoning her Muslim faith in favor of Christianity, an action that, under Sharia law, indicates that she committed adultery with her husband, a non-Muslim.

Because the law considers her a Muslim, her marriage to a Christian man is considered void and adulterous. Marriage to a non-Muslim man is prohibited for Muslim women. Ibrahim and her husband have a 20-month-old son and she is expected to give birth to her second child sometime next month.

In past cases involving pregnant women, the Sudanese government has waited until the woman gave birth before executing a sentence. If sentenced to death she will likely be flogged with 100 lashes then hanged.

The blatant disrespect for freedom of religion and interference in the personal life of Sudanese citizens is outraging people in Sudan and abroad. Authorities have closed Khartuom University indefinitely after Sudanese students there mounted a protest begging for the end to human rights violations, more freedom, and better social and economic conditions.

In Khartuom, foreign embassies are urging the government to rethink its decision. A joint statement issued from the embassies of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands says, “We call upon the government of Sudan to respect the right to freedom of religion, including one's right to change one's faith or beliefs, a right which is enshrined in international human rights law as well as in Sudan's own 2005 Interim Constitution.

We further urge Sudanese legal authorities to approach Ms. Meriam's case with justice and compassion that is in keeping with the values of the Sudanese people,” the joint statement read.

Follow Olivia on Twitter Twitter: @nahmias_report Contributing Journalist: @OCElswick

Related articles

• Christian woman could face death in Sudan for her faith (cnn.com)
• Sudan woman faces death for penalty for apostasy (Aljazeera.com)
• Sudanese woman may face death for choosing Christianity over Islam (reuters.com)
• Sudan woman facing death on grounds of her religion must be released (amnesty.org)

When Justice Backfires: At Least 4.1% Of Death Row Convicts Are Innocent

Michael Ransom, Contributing EditorLast Modified: 20:38 p.m. DST, 6 May 2014

WASHINGTON, DC - Until last week, the accuracy of death penalty application in the United States had been the subject of speculation. Given to the trades of debate and guesswork, even prominent thinkers with important positions in the judicial system add to the growing body of conjecture. In 2007, Justice Antonin Scalia calculated that the American legal system is correct 99.973% of the time. His math, data and motives are altogether dubious, and his claims carry very little weight in both judicial and scientific circles. 

Rate of false conviction of criminal defendants who are sentenced to death is a landmark study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and written by Gross, O'Brien, Hu and Kennedy, who are researchers at University of Michigan Law, Michigan State Law, American College of Radiology and University of Pennsylvania Medicine, respectively. They conclude that no less than 4.1% of death row inmates have been wrongly convicted, a percentage they say is the most conservative calculation possible, according to records from 1989 to 2012.

These experts use data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics from the Department of Justice and numbers from The Death Penalty Information Center to arrive at their findings. Using survival analysis, the team is able to isolate the frequency at which wrongful convictions are overturned, and apply that ratio to the death row population. Resources and legal expertise are rationed to inmates nearing their scheduled execution, and survival analysis standardizes the effects of these efforts in uncovering groundless convictions across the board. The authors of the study and many in the national conversation agree that the true number of innocent convicts living on death row is much higher.

Meanwhile, executions throughout the country have gained considerable media attention. As European producers of lethal drugs have stopped supplying their products to the United States for the express purpose of execution, officials have struggled to obtain injections that are neither cruel nor unusual. Last week, convicted murderer and rapist Clayton Lockett was put to death in Oklahoma with a needle that introduced only certain ingredients of the drug cocktail into his bloodstream. Lockett's execution was halted midway, and he died ten minutes later of a heart attack. Charles Warner is the next to be executed in Oklahoma, and he is seeking postponement while Lockett's proceedings are investigated by a third-party.

1 2 Next Page »

Published: 6 May 2014 (Page 2 of 2)

The Supreme Court of Oklahoma has recently sounded off on inmates' request for the names and types of substances that they will be administered. The court found that it is constitutional to withhold this information from convicts. Justice Steven Taylor responded that they had no more right to this disclosure than "if they were being executed in the electric chair, they would have no right to know whether OG&E or PSO were providing the electricity; if they were being hanged, they would have no right to know whether it be cotton or nylon rope; or if they were being executed by firing squad, they would have no right to know whether it be by Winchester or Remington ammunition."

Well, that sounded poetic, and almost made sense. But Lockett's inadequate execution is just one of many similar cases recently, ever since untested American drugs have taken the place of better-researched European counterparts. This national experiment has yielded cruel results, such as the Ohio inmate who cried "I can feel my whole body burning" during his lethal injection earlier this year. So, Taylor's statement would be more accurate if he offered comparisons that mirror the humane nature of former injections and the inhumane reality of newer concoctions. Surely Taylor would agree that death row convicts should know whether they would be killed by high voltage or low voltage electric shocks; nylon rope or barbed wire; Winchester rounds or rubber bullets. Similarly, Taylor should acknowledge the inherent difference between the type of injection that renders the individual unconscious before killing him, and the type that leaves people writhing on the gurney, slowly dying from a heart attack. 

True, the crimes of these two men in Oklahoma are heinous, and true, they should never be free to walk the streets again. But soon the nation will have to come to terms with the costs of capital punishment, and not in terms of dollars and cents. Of the 121 inmates on death row in Arizona, at least 5 are innocent according to Rate of false conviction. In Texas, the national sanctuary of  the death penalty, 273 are awaiting execution and no less than 10 of these individuals are innocent. California's collection of convicts numbers 746, which includes at least 29 innocent people. Nationwide, 3,108 offenders are waiting on death row. The only problem? 124 of these people did not commit the offense. And probably more.

A common and intelligible rallying cry behind the death penalty is "if your loved one was senselessly taken by a vicious predator, maybe then you would understand." Certainly. It is a tragedy that anyone should be taken before their time. Inherent in that statement, though, is the value of human life, especially moral and upright people. Americans will need to address issues in the application of the death penalty and the conditions in society that make murder and rape commonplace. When the stakes are life and death, why perpetuate the injustice to 124+ more victims? Why extend that pain to countless more family members?

These 124 and more upcoming executions are preventable deaths. The desire to apply justice to reprehensible perpetrators should not turn us into criminals ourselves.

Return to Page 1 »

Follow Michael on Twitter Twitter: @nahmias_report Contributing Editor: @MAndrewRansom

Related articles

• Obama troubled by botched Oklahoma execution (news.yahoo.com)
• Oklahoma botches first execution in 80 years (latimes.com)
• In victim's Oklahoma town, no tears for inmate in botched execution (latimes.com)
• Death penalty: Botched execution using new drug combo ends in Oklahoma prisoner's death by heart attack (vancouversun.com)
• A Botched Execution And The Death Penalty Now (onpoint.wbur.org)

Death Penalty for Three Rapists Sets Precedent in India

New Delhi India Gang Rape Court Trial Graffiti Protest, Photo by AFP

MUMBAI, India - On Friday, three men convicted of two different 2013 rape cases were sentenced to death by hanging. The heavy sentence and relatively speedy conviction are thanks to the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013.

Mohammed Kasim Sheikh, Salim Ansari, and Vijay Jadhav were the first tried under the terms of the adjusted laws and this will be the first time India has initiated the death sentence for a non-fatal crime.

Among other things, the Act targets repeat offenders and gang rapists. There is also an effort for courts to be more victim-friendly. For instance, it is now illegal to bring up the question of a victim's character during trial. Before the law, reports of rape were largely ignored in India and rape victims were mistreated.

Increased awareness of rape occurred after a fatal case in Delhi in December 2012. A 23-year-old female boarded a bus with her male companion. All six men on the bus beat her companion and raped and beat her repeatedly before dumping them both on the side of the road. She was hospitalized and died from her injuries 13 days later. Public outrage lead to a greater effort to deter rapists and lift the taboo of being a rape victim. The Criminal Law Amendment Act was enacted three months after the Delhi victim's death.

Sheikh, Ansari and Jadhav were originally only charged with the August 2013 rape of a 22-year-old photo journalist who was on assignment in an abandoned mill. After the case became public, an 18-year-old victim came forward and said that these same men had raped her in the same mill only a month earlier. It was this confession that upped their sentence from life in prison to death.