Defendant Rights in Saudi Arabia (Sharia) and the US in Criminal Law

Introduction

In the United States, the constitution is regarded as a supreme law outlining the defendant rights. The law is applicable to every individual in America despite his or her ethnic, racial or religious background. In fact, an immigrant to America must take an Oath of Allegiance to symbolize their intention to abide by the laws of the land. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia Kingdom is at the heart of the Muslim world.  Not only is it the largest country in the Middle East but also, it is the birthplace of the Muslim religion.

Sharia Law governs Saudi monarchy. The Islamic law is derived from Sunna and Quran guiding all aspects of ordinary Muslim life. There is no penal code in the Islamic world as opposed to the US. Sharia law judicial interpretation rather than written law determines criminal offenses, defendant rights, and possible punishments.  The law allows for death penalties if defendants committed offenses against ‘God' and people. 

The Research Problem

The research focuses on shedding light on Saudi Arabia’s Sharia Law and US’s Criminal law. It analyzes the sharp contrast between the two legal systems in terms of rights accorded to defendants and accused individuals.

Research Methods

This research utilizes explorative method to gather data about Sharia law and US legal system. The data gathered is analyzed to provide solution to the problem of defendant rights in the two distinct states. The paper relies on secondary research including literature reviews and other qualitative approaches.

Sources of Defendant Rights in Saudi Arabia

Lately, Saudi Arabia government declares the country’s criminal justice system has reached a high standard. The claim is not justified because visitors and residents have no idea on criminal activities or individual rights they have if accused. In 2002, Saudi judiciary created a criminal procedure code also referred to as The Law of Criminal Procedure. The criminal procedure falls short of international standards defining basic defendant rights. The code, for example, allows the prosecutor to issue warrants of arrest without a judicial review. In addition, a prosecutor has the right to prolong detention prior to the commencement of trial.

Saudi Defendants in Criminal cases have limited rights if any. Law enforcers conduct arrests without warrants and during interrogations, the accused is treated without human dignity. Trial and verdict sessions can be conducted without an issuance of notice to the involved parties. Besides, challenging testimonies are often blocked from inclusion in the judgment hence plaguing the court proceedings and the final verdict.  Most defendants have reported severe beatings and constant threats from prosecutors and police officers.  The treats are meant to extort vital information through confessions that can be used against the accused during trial. To make it worse, the defendant is not entitled to bail rights. It is common for people to be held without formal or substantial charges.

Sometimes, defendants in Saudi Arabia and most Islamic states are discouraged from hiring professional lawyers (Rishmawi 172). The issue led Shura Council to approve Public Defender Program establishment during early 2010 but it is yet to become effective. Gender inequality is evident in testimony sessions where a single male testimony is equalized to testimonies given by two women. Trials lack juries and are mostly conducted in an enclosed environment away from public scrutiny. If the defendant is a foreign national, consulate officials are restricted to attend the trial sessions.

Sources of Sharia Law and US Criminal Laws

Sharia Law differs significantly from US criminal law in the fact that Allah prescribes the applied law. It will never be subject to amendment via a law-making body or a high court. Muslims believe that Allah revealed the law to his prophet via sacred texts including Sunna and Quran. Islamic scholars interpret the law for application Saudi Arabia’s justice system. On the contrary, US’s Congress makes laws through bills and amendments to the US constitution. The bill of rights forms the foundation of US Democracy and accords rights and freedoms to people from all factions.

Determination of sources of each legal system plays a critical role in interpretation and understanding of the law.  This is because Sharia law is non-amendable and nobody has the authority to make radical changes to provisions in the main sources. Changes regarding defendant rights can be made to US law. If deemed necessary, the modifications will be executed to comply with needs of the people. It is also notable that there is no influence of ‘the hand of God’ when US laws are drafted, but it does not imply that the efficiency of Sharia law is limited. Islamic scholars have the authority to interpret new laws through strict reliance of Quran and Sunna.

Origins of Sharia Law and US Law

Sharia law dictates legislation's compliance with it and other generally accepted Islamic principles. Some powers of Saudi Arabia Islamic legislature include passing laws that meet Sharia law’s requirements and provisions. Secondly, they pass laws that fulfill societal needs. US law is democratic and more liberal with sovereign Congress that passes suitable laws for the community and its needs. Congress sovereignty is may be surrendered wholly or partially to an authoritative government arm such as courts of justice and other legislative organs.  It is possible to regain the authority through a congressional act. The electorate holds Congress accountable for its actions with the help of media houses and other human rights bodies.

Sharia law has a divine origin, comprehensive, perfect and complete as when Allah revealed to his Prophet. To date, it is viewed as flawless and unchangeable. American legal system has been reformed on several occasions as per timely needs and to incorporate changes and modernization.  Since the constitution's enactment in 1789, it has been amended more than 26 times to incorporate rights of the minority, the marginalized and criminal offenders.  In fact, the initial ten amendments compose Bill of Rights (BoR) that protects individual liberty, place restrictions, and justice.  Criticisms o US law and constitution often results in a subsequent amendment, improvements, and changes. 

Sharia Law defines crime as a legal prohibition set by Allah, the Supreme Being, and any infringement leads to punishments as he prescribed. The legal prohibitions can include forbidden acts and omissions of enjoined acts thus commission of any unlawful act whose punishment is listed as a crime in Sharia.  Sharia refers all crimes as Jinayat (felonies) which implies that all can be tried on indictment be they mere religious sins or serious crimes. The Western legal systems consider prohibitions to include omissions or serious acts as listed in classifications of criminal offenses. Omissions and acts disapproved by religious or philosophical bodies cannot be justified in American criminal court. Crimes are classified according to seriousness.

Death Penalty

The 1990 Cairo Declaration on human rights reiterated that Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia shall not grant any right that contradicts Sharia law. This makes the criminal laws of such countries rigid and resistant to change and democratization.  For example, a man has a right to be compensated (haqq adami) though if it is his wish, he can forgive the defendant (Powell 214). In American law, human rights act must be implemented at all legislative and judicial stages and processes. At least, the relevant authorities should do it in principle.

There are efforts in America's judicial system to scrap off death penalty. Already, most states have halted the extreme punishment due to calls by human rights activists on the need to respect lives. Today, US is inching closer to a death-penalty free state that will elevate life imprisonment as the highest punishment a defendant can receive if they commit serious and inhumane crimes such as rape and first-degree murder. Subsequent amendments have eliminated corporal punishments.  Consuming alcohol and committing adultery are considered religious sins, but are not classified as crimes in US legal context. It is a different case in Saudi Arabia, where every sin is counted as a crime and is punishable by law.

 Under Sharia law, cases of treason like Apostasy are seen as a betrayal of Prophet Mohammed and Ummah (the public). A person that does this has already waged a war on Allah’s Apostle and Allah himself. The punishments for such crimes include chopping off of limbs, crucifixion, and beheading. Sharia also classifies invaders of Islamic land under this category. In America, a person that betrays the state can attract a maximum sentence of life in prison. Converting from one religion to the other is a rightful personal choice because US citizens are entitled to freedom of religion or none.

Sharia presumes innocence differently to American law. An offender is guilty until proven innocent, but it is vice versa in the case of US criminal laws. A Sharia court has a variable standard of proof characterized by inconsistency in comparison to US court of justice.  Criminal cases in America involve a presentation of strong evidence to the jury or a judge. To convict an offender, the evidence presented must convince jury’s majority beyond a reasonable doubt.  Cases of rape in Saudi Arabian Courts involve evidence from only male Muslims. US laws admit evidence in equal weight irrespective of gender or social background. 

Effectiveness of Sharia Law in Comparison to US Law

The western Legal system is slowly creeping into the Muslim world. Unlike in the past, most Muslim scholars and lawyers admit that there are major flaws in Sharia law system. Most of them view Islamic law as barbaric especially towards women and Muslims of low social class (Fukuyama 36). Contrarily, Christians and non-Muslims have a little understanding on how Sharia legal system works. Still, people criticize the harshness and rigidity in Hadd crime punishments. The criticism gains weight due to sympathy towards human dignity that offenders and hard-core criminals deserve despite their evil deeds. What people do not realize is that the few who are subjected to harsh means of punishment serve as a lesson to those contemplating crime. Ultimately, the society will become more peaceful and secure.

Sharia law disapproves imprisonment due to the isolation of an offender from the society. Sharia scholars argue that isolation does not trigger the feeling of guilt or shame and a need for repentance.  Stoning, amputations, whipping, beheading and other extreme Islamic punishments not only prevent offenders from committing future crimes but also they serve as warning and deterrence to the general public.  The treatment accorded to ex-convict determines their rehabilitation. In an American legal system, ex-convicts hardly lead a dignified lifestyle. The public stigmatizes most ex-convicts. It is hard for them to secure a decent job even if they have the necessary qualifications. This leads them to revert to their old ways as a consolation.  For instance, the legislators are amending modern democracy legislations to shut out ex-convicts from vying for an elective position. The law also refrains them from holding top level positions in public offices. A section of legal experts interprets this as lack of trust in the rehabilitation system. 

Ex-convicts Treatment in Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia’s Sharia law prohibits stigmatization of rehabilitated offenders. At the end of an official punishment, convicts are viewed as dignified humans with equal rights as any other citizen. No records are kept in terms of criminality history. In fact, the state encourages a return to a normal life and a quick integration to the society. Because the state accords the offenders a decent life and a respectful place in the community, offenders are quick to rehabilitate and begin a new life journey.

The evidence that Western legal system is ineffective in terms of rehabilitating criminals is seen in the rise of crime rates in major cities such as New York, Chicago, and New Orleans (Andrews 39). Community sentences, capital punishments, and fines are not enough to deter ex-convicts from re-launching their evil campaign and unleashing mayhem to the society. Modem Saudi Arabia has dismal cases of rape, violence and adultery. The country is one of the safest places to live in terms of low crime rate. However, westerners argue that heightened security results from compromised human rights and neglect of human dignity. Strict Sharia law that the West despise governs Saudi Arabia, but a close scrutiny reveals that there is some sense of peace and rehabilitation due to its implementation. I recommend further impartial studies to be done regarding the effectiveness of religious laws as compared to America’s liberal legal system.

Works Cited

Powell, Emilia Justyna. "Islamic law states and the International Court of Justice." Journal of Peace Research 50.2 (2013): 203-217. Print.

Andrews, Donald A., and James Bonta. "Rehabilitating criminal justice policy and practice." Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 16.1 (2010): 39-42.

Rishmawi, Mervat. "The Arab Charter on Human Rights and the League of Arab States: An Update." Human Rights Law Review 10.1 (2010): 169-178.Print.

Fukuyama, F. (2010). Transitions to the Rule of Law. Journal of Democracy,21(1), 33-44.