Thread: Amnesty 'outrage' at Saudi paralysis sentence

The reported sentencing of paralysis for a Saudi man as punishment for paralysing another man has been described as "outrageous" by a leading human rights group.

Saudi reports say the 24-year-old man could be paralysed from the waist down if he cannot pay his victim one million riyals (£250,000) in compensation.

Amnesty International says the sentence is a form of torture.
The man has been in prison for 10 years since he stabbed a friend in the back.

Saudi newspapers say Ali al-Khawahir was 14 when he paralysed his friend in the attack in the Eastern Province town of al-Ahsa.

The law of qisas, or retribution, in Saudi Arabia means his victim can demand that he suffers exactly the same punishment as he caused.

"Paralysing someone as punishment for a crime would be torture," said Ann Harrison, Middle East and North Africa deputy director at Amnesty.

"It is time the authorities in Saudi Arabia start respecting their international legal obligations and remove these terrible punishments from the law."

This is the latest example of Saudi Arabia's fundamentalist interpretation of Islamic law attracting international criticism.

Amnesty says the law has seen judicially approved eye-gougings and tooth extractions.

The rights group condemns the practice as tantamount to torture, urging that the latest punishment must not be enforced.

Amnesty's intervention will certainly fuel a growing debate in Saudi Arabia itself over its style of justice, says the BBC's Arab affairs editor, Sebastian Usher.

BBC News - Amnesty 'outrage' at Saudi paralysis sentence


What a bizarre sentence. Does the Saudi state owe this criminal lifelong care as a paralysis victim after his sentence is carried out or does he just drag himself around on his hands?

Barbaric.

The context of this 'eye for an eye' punishment was developed several thousand years ago as a means of limitation when the Israeli tribes where much more likely to have a blood feud for perceived transgressions, which is obviously unsustainable for a relatively small group of people living in a harsh environment, so instead of 'an entire family for an eye' this idea of 'proportionate punishment/response' was developed.

Unfortunately, these damn fellows have not developed since. (And take it 100% literally).

Originally Posted by Looper

The man has been in prison for 10 years since he stabbed a friend in the back.

So he's already done 10 years and now they're going to fuck him up.

No different to the barbaric septics who habitually incarcerate men for up to 20 plus years then kill them because their " justice " demands it i.e. the mob want it.

Americans are no different to savages elsewhere in the world. They just believe in different gods.

if the law of the land is not to be followed and the rules of the game are to be changed in the middle of the game my question is, "What would a fair punishment be"????

Originally Posted by kingwilly

The context of this 'eye for an eye' punishment was developed several thousand years ago as a means of limitation when the Israeli tribes where much more likely to have a blood feud for perceived transgressions, which is obviously unsustainable for a relatively small group of people living in a harsh environment, so instead of 'an entire family for an eye' this idea of 'proportionate punishment/response' was developed.

I thought 'eye for an eye' was the first code of law in Babylon, long before Israel, an initiative by the ruler Hammurabi.

Originally Posted by Kurgen

Originally Posted by Looper

The man has been in prison for 10 years since he stabbed a friend in the back.

So he's already done 10 years and now they're going to fuck him up.

All parts of a Sharia sentence must be carried out to prevent people from escaping Allah's justice. If a crim gets, say, flogging, 5 years, amputation and beheading for different offences, even if they were committed during the same event, the flogging and amputation will be done early in his term and he will be executed at the end of his sentence. Not much to look forward to.

Coming to a place near you.

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by kingwilly

The context of this 'eye for an eye' punishment was developed several thousand years ago as a means of limitation when the Israeli tribes where much more likely to have a blood feud for perceived transgressions, which is obviously unsustainable for a relatively small group of people living in a harsh environment, so instead of 'an entire family for an eye' this idea of 'proportionate punishment/response' was developed.

I thought 'eye for an eye' was the first code of law in Babylon, long before Israel, an initiative by the ruler Hammurabi.

Ach, just a detail, but he did manage to bring the Israelites into it.

Originally Posted by leemo

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by kingwilly

The context of this 'eye for an eye' punishment was developed several thousand years ago as a means of limitation when the Israeli tribes where much more likely to have a blood feud for perceived transgressions, which is obviously unsustainable for a relatively small group of people living in a harsh environment, so instead of 'an entire family for an eye' this idea of 'proportionate punishment/response' was developed.

I thought 'eye for an eye' was the first code of law in Babylon, long before Israel, an initiative by the ruler Hammurabi.

Ach, just a detail, but he did manage to bring the Israelites into it.

I would have thought According to the liberal left that the horrific acts performed by Islamics, not only to Infidels but their own kind too , is Entirely the fault of the USA and Israel

You missed out the rather important detail, you can only use the money you buy your way out of the sentence if the victim is prepared to accept it.

the sham in the law is that, rather like the death sentence, these eye for an eye sentences cannot be undone in any meaningful way. Should an innocent person become a victim to this punishment... for some reason the judge, jury and prosecution are globally given impunity for the crime they have committed against this person. You sentence an innocent person to death, you are a murderer and those who contributed to this miss justice are conspirators.... you should face the consequences just as any other citizen would.

Ah OK, I did miss that but in this case they are prepared to accept, right?

In fact it was haggled down, to 1Million donkeys (or something )

I guess just like Thailand if the rich are the guilty ones then it's not so hard to get the family to "accept" the pay off.

Originally Posted by SEA Traveler

if the law of the land is not to be followed and the rules of the game are to be changed in the middle of the game my question is, "What would a fair punishment be"????

punishments are not meant to be "fair", they are meant to deter others from committing similar crimes

in a "fair and just" society, people would not commit crimes as they would be no reason to do so

haha

Originally Posted by SEA Traveler

if the law of the land is not to be followed and the rules of the game are to be changed in the middle of the game my question is, "What would a fair punishment be"????

Good question SEA.

I am in favour of the death penalty as a practical resort for outrageous crimes where the criminal has no hope rehabilitation and is of no value to society or even himself but I am against physical maiming or torturing of criminals. It is gruesome in inhumane and impractical as it puts an substabntial burden of care back on the state for their subsequent care and is not constructive. They should be made to carry out some constructive activity for the rest of their lives in detention and encouraged to reform themselves morally.

Originally Posted by DrAndy

punishments are not meant to be "fair", they are meant to deter others from committing similar crimes

Punishments are meant for 3 reasons I would say

1. Punishment and suffering for the criminal as a lesson
2. Moral reformation and correction of the criminal
3. Society's visible and accountable retribution for the reference of other future potential criminals

Originally Posted by Looper

3. Society's visible and accountable retribution for the reference of other future potential criminals

Actually there is a 4 also I think

4. Society's visible and accountable retribution for the reference of society's law abiding members so that they can see that crime does not go unpunished and they can enjoy the sense of fairness and feel that abiding by the law has a practical benefit (i.e. not being punished).

Originally Posted by hazz

You missed out the rather important detail, you can only use the money you buy your way out of the sentence if the victim is prepared to accept it.

the sham in the law is that, rather like the death sentence, these eye for an eye sentences cannot be undone in any meaningful way. Should an innocent person become a victim to this punishment... for some reason the judge, jury and prosecution are globally given impunity for the crime they have committed against this person. You sentence an innocent person to death, you are a murderer and those who contributed to this miss justice are conspirators.... you should face the consequences just as any other citizen would.

Yeah Hazz you mean like those in "high places" do here in Thailand taking full advantage of some poor person on 6,000 a month!

Any worthwhile penal code in a civilised society incorporates three elements:

1. Punishment which should be proportionate.

2. To act as a deterrent and protect society.

3. Redemption through rehabilitation.

The USA fails on several counts in that periods of incarceration can be absurdly long and their penchant for judicial slaughter renders no.3 redundant since if one is fucking dead then reformation is impossible.

The European model is perhaps the best on offer in that it avoids pandering to the lumpen blood lust so prevalent among the unsophisticated and just plain stupid as exemplified in this forum and generally the US.

Originally Posted by DrAndy

Originally Posted by SEA Traveler

if the law of the land is not to be followed and the rules of the game are to be changed in the middle of the game my question is, "What would a fair punishment be"????

punishments are not meant to be "fair", they are meant to deter others from committing similar crimes

in a "fair and just" society, people would not commit crimes as they would be no reason to do so

haha

the opposite is the case. punishments are supposed to be fair and proportionate to the crime committed based upon its effects upon the victim, their family and society in general. The consistent use of punishment is one of the hallmarks of a just and fair society. comparison of say saudi arabia, thailand, the US and finland would be a real eye opener regarding this concept.

And its because there are three separate sets of victims to any serious crime; means the vicim or their family do not have the right to sell judicial forgiveness to those who can pay.

Originally Posted by piwanoi

^ In another thread one member said maybe the Pope could drag the Catholic Church kicking and screaming into the 17th Century, of course that,s his opinion , however in Dec 2011 a women in Saudi Arabia was beheaded for "witchcraft and Sorcery" reading this BBC article it would appear that unfortunately Islam is still in the stoneage BBC News - Saudi woman executed for 'witchcraft and sorcery'

reading this BBC article it would appear that unfortunately Islam is still in the stoneage

Are only just realizing?
Stories like that have been appearing as long as I can remember.

Originally Posted by thegent

Any worthwhile penal code in a civilised society incorporates three elements:

1. Punishment which should be proportionate.

2. To act as a deterrent and protect society.

3. Redemption through rehabilitation.

The USA fails on several counts in that periods of incarceration can be absurdly long and their penchant for judicial slaughter renders no.3 redundant since if one is fucking dead then reformation is impossible.

The European model is perhaps the best on offer in that it avoids pandering to the lumpen blood lust so prevalent among the unsophisticated and just plain stupid as exemplified in this forum and generally the US.

TheGent, please FFS stop playing silly games with your usual rabid ANTI American stance ,why not go through this thread were you said quite plainly in your earlier post that there is "no difference" between the justice system of America and Saudi , so in my return post I asked you if you could post something comparable that in America people are beheaded for Witchcraft and Sorcery like they have been in Saudi, the silence was fucking deafening to the point of your own imbecilic self denial ,take your liberal left head out of your arse and smell the coffee and not the shit you keep spouting

Originally Posted by Koojo

Originally Posted by piwanoi

^ In another thread one member said maybe the Pope could drag the Catholic Church kicking and screaming into the 17th Century, of course that,s his opinion , however in Dec 2011 a women in Saudi Arabia was beheaded for "witchcraft and Sorcery" reading this BBC article it would appear that unfortunately Islam is still in the stoneage BBC News - Saudi woman executed for 'witchcraft and sorcery'

reading this BBC article it would appear that unfortunately Islam is still in the stoneage

Are only just realizing?
Stories like that have been appearing as long as I can remember.

Nah Koojo, but thanks for bringing it to mine and others attention, and with respect its been my opinion for quite some time now ,whilst the Wests Justice system is far from perfect by any means as you I and others are aware already ,the sheer savagery of the Islamic "justice" system bears no recognition as far as human rights go ,and yet some, through their twisted anti American mindset state that some how there is no difference ,of which I feel no animosity towards them, only pity .

Originally Posted by thegent

Any worthwhile penal code in a civilised society incorporates three elements:

1. Punishment which should be proportionate.

2. To act as a deterrent and protect society.

3. Redemption through rehabilitation.

The USA fails on several counts in that periods of incarceration can be absurdly long and their penchant for judicial slaughter renders no.3 redundant since if one is fucking dead then reformation is impossible.

The European model is perhaps the best on offer in that it avoids pandering to the lumpen blood lust so prevalent among the unsophisticated and just plain stupid as exemplified in this forum and generally the US.

Simple question Do you call the penal code in Saudi Arabia Civilized?