The International League Against Arbitrary Detention urges the Government of Saudi Arabia to take all the necessary actions to implement the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Opinion No. 27/2023 concerning Salma bint Sami bin Abdulmohsen al-Shehab and Nourah bin Saeed al-Qahtani, asking the Government of Saudi Arabia to immediately and unconditionally release them and to accord them an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations in accordance with international law.
Read the full WGAD Opinion concerning Salma bint Sami bin Abdulmohsen al-Shehab and Nourah bin Saeed al-Qahtani (Saudi Arabia): Opinion No. 27/2023.
HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDER ARRESTED FOR THEIR ONLINE ACTIVISM
Salma bint Sami bin Abdulmohsen al-Shehab and Nourah bin Saeed al-Qahtani are both nationals of Saudi Arabia, and were respectively 24 and 47 years old at the time of their arrest.
Ms. Al-Shehab is a women’s rights advocate and member of the Shia Muslim minority in Saudi Arabia. On numerous occasions, she peacefully defended women's rights via social medias, namely Twitter. Similarly, Ms. Al-Qahtani used to share her views on Twitter concerning political affairs and human rights in Saudi Arabia, notably calling for the release of political detainees and criticising abuses committed by the authorities.
On 15 January 2021, Ms. Al-Shehab was called in for “questioning” at the Presidency of State Security facility in Dammam. There, the officers questioned her about her online activities and tried to coerce her into stating support for the Muslim Brotherhood. From this day onwards, Ms. Al-Shehab was detained in jail and frequently questioned and harassed by officers. As for Ms. Al-Qahtani, she was arrested by officers of the Presidency of State Security on 4 July 2021.
In February and March 2022, both were convicted under the Anti-Terrorism law, on similar charges - namely, having threatened national security and public order and endangered national stability through her online activities. While Ms. Al-Shehab was sentenced to 6 years in prison, Ms. Al-Qahtani was sentenced to 13 years in prison. Both also had their telephone confiscated and their Twitter account shut down. In August 2022, in appeal, both were convicted during their respective trials for similar but also new charges under the Anti-Terrorism and Anti-Cybercrime Laws, and were sentenced to higher prison sentences than the original ones. Specifically, Ms. Al-Shehab was sentenced to 34 years in prison, while Ms. Al-Qahtani was sentenced to 45 years in prison.
The Government was given the opportunity to answer these allegations, which it did.
ARRESTED WITHOUT A WARRANT AND HELD INCOMMUNICADO BASED ON VAGUE LAWS
Ms. Al-Shehab was allegedly arrested without a warrant and informed of the charges against her only 10 months after her arrest. The Government claimed she was arrested under terrorism charges with a warrant, and that both Ms. Al-Shebab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were informed of the reasons for their arrest. Considering that the Government's answer lacked specificity in relation the information it gave about the arrest warrant, the Working Group established that the right of Ms. Al-Shebab not to be arbitrarily arrested and detained, guaranteed under article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, had been violated.
The source alleged that, following her arrest, Ms. Al-Shehab was held incommunicado for 13 days, during which she was not allowed to contact a lawyer or correspond with her family. Following this period, she was not always allowed to inform her family about her whereabouts and was only able to access a lawyer in October 2021. The Government answered that Ms. Al-Shebab was allowed to have visits and contacts regularly since the start of her detention, which the Working Group found insufficient as not indicating specifically enough the interactions Ms. Al-Shebab was allowed to have during the 13 first days of her detention. In this light, the Working Group considered that during her pre-trial detention, Ms. Al-Shebab's rights to be protected by the law, to challenge the legality of her detention, and to access an effective remedy were violated, under article 3, 8, 6 and 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Moreover, Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were prosecuted and sentenced on the basis of several articles contained in the Anti-Terrorism Law and the Anti-Cybercrime Law. According to the source, these provisions lack legal certainty, which the Government refuted. Recalling previous findings of several UN bodies, the Working Group noted that these provisions were indeed vaguely and broadly worded. As such, the Working Group found that the use of these articles, as well as the adding of discretionary 1 and 5 years prison terms to the sentences of both Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani, had violated the principle of legality, enshrined in article 11(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
All in all, the Working Group thus concluded that the arrest and detention of Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were arbitrary under categoy I, as lacking a legal basis.
DETAINED FOR EXERCISING THEIR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS TO FREEDOM OF OPINION, EXPRESSION AND TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS
The source argued that Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were detained on the basis of the exercise of their right to freedom of expression, specifically through their human rights activism via Twitter. The Government claimed to respect freedom of opinion and expression unless it endangered public order and/or social norms, but asserted that both individuals had committed serious terrorist crimes.
Recalling past similar cases it had to examine, the Working Group noted that it was often the case that individuals had been arbitrarily detained based on the Anti-Terrorism and Anti-Cybercrime Laws for having expressing their political views via online comments. The Working Group considered that both Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani's dissemination of human-rights messages online was part of their legitimate exercise of their freedoms of opinion and expression, and also part of their right to take part in the conduct of public affairs since their online activities concerned matters of public interests. The Working Group further noted that the Government did not prove there were legitimate reasons to limit these freedoms. As such, the Working Group considered that the above-mentioned rights of Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani, protected under articles 19 and 21 (1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had been violated.
Therefore, the Working Group considered that the detentions of Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were arbitrary under category II.
MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF THE RIGHTS TO FAIR TRIAL
Despite determining that no trial should have occurred, both Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were tried and received lengthy sentences - 34 and 45 years of imprisonment respectively.
Following her arrest, Ms. Al-Shehab was held incommunicado for 13 days and detained in pre-trial detention for 10 months without appearing before a judicial authority. She was finally presented in front of such an authority in October 2021 and subsequently tried in a closed trial. Considering the Government's answer insufficient as not justifying the delays in the proceedings agaisnt Ms. Al-Shehab, the Working Group considered that this situation had violated her rights to presumption of innocence and to be tried without undue delay, enshrined in articles 10 and 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights .
Ms. Al-Shehab was denied access to legal counsel until October 2021, and as such was interrogated without it during her pre-trial detention. When such counsel was granted to her, her communications were monitored, and in addition, sudden changes in the trial schedule prevented her legal team to adequately prepare her defence. Though the Government answered Ms. Al-Shehab had access to a lawyer, the Government found it insufficient for not specifying the period prior to October 2021 and the conditions in which such access was granted to her. Thus, the Working Group considered this situation had violated Ms. Al-Shehab's right to access a defence and to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law, under articles 10 and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Besides, during her incommunicado detention and solitary confinement, Ms. Al-Shehab was allegedly subjected to cruel and degrading treatment, namely to threats, insults, harassment and improper methods of interrogation. The Government broadly denied this, without addressing the specific claims. Considering the above, the Working Group considered that Ms. Al-Shehab's right not to be subjected to such mistreatments, protected under article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, had been violated, and expressed its concerns concerning the impact it could have on her ability to defend herself.
Both individuals were tried by the Specialized Criminal Court, whose independence and impartiality have been questioned by various human rights bodies according to the source. Notably, this Court has constantly refused to act on claims of torture made by defendants facing terrorism charges. Upholding these previous findings, the Working Group concluded that Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani's rights to be tried by an independent and impartial tribunal and to be presumed innocent, guaranteed by articles 10 and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, had thus been violated.
Lastly, the original and appeal trials of both Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were reportedly conducted in closed sessions, denying public access and transparency. Considering the Government's answer insufficient for only mentioning what its national laws prescribes, the Working Group found that the right of both individuals to a public trial was violated, under article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Besides, the Working Group expressed its concern about the lengthy and disproportionate prison sentences imposed to both Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani.
Consequently, the Working Group concluded that the violations of the right to a fair trial
of Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani were of such gravity as to render their detention arbitrary under category III.
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST FOR ACTIVISM AND GENDER
The source claimed that the detention of Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani resulted from their political opinions and online human rights advocacy. Moreover, concerning Ms. Al-Shehab only, her arrest would have also resulted from her gender and belonging to the Shia Muslim community. They were charged with terrorism despite their activism being unrelated to it, and tried in the Specialized Criminal Court, which previous UN findings considered to be increansingly used to target activists.
The Government refuted the above allegations. The Working Group however found this answer insufficient as once again only relying on their own national laws, and considered that there was strong evidence of discrimination in this case. Thus, the Working Group considered both individuals were detained on a discriminatory basis, namely as a result of their activism and peaceful expression, as well as against Ms. Al-Shehab’s gender and religion, which thus violated articles 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Henceforth, the Working Group considered the detentions of both Ms. Al-Shehab and Ms. Al-Qahtani to be arbitrary under category V.
CONCLUSIONS OF THE UN WORKING GROUP AGAINST ARBITRARY DETENTION
In light of the foregoing, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention considered that the detention of Salma bint Sami bin Abdulmohsen al-Shehab and Nourah bin Saeed al-Qahtani were arbitrary and fell under categories I, II, III, and V because their deprivation of liberty contravened articles 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 19, and 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Working Group recommended that the Government of Saudi Arabia take the necessary steps to remedy the situation of Salma bint Sami bin Abdulmohsen al-Shehab and Nourah bin Saeed al-Qahtani without delay and bring it into conformity with the relevant international norms. The Working Group considered that, taking into account all circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release them immediately and accord them an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law.
Eventually, the Working Group requested the Government of Saudi Arabia to bring its laws, especially the Anti-Terrorism Law, into conformity with international human rights law.
Comentarios