Tuesday, 27 February 2007
By Sabria S. Jawhar
The Saudi Gazette
JEDDAH
THE issue of forced divorce, an unlikely topic to be discussed at the Jeddah Economic Forum, became an unexpected hot-button topic during a panel session Monday that erupted into a brief confrontation between some audience members and Riyadh’s human rights representative.
During a question-and-answer period in the afternoon session on the role of law in economic reform attended by former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and Human Rights representative Abdullah Aziz Mohammed Hinaidi, the audience peppered Hinaidi with questions about his views of forced divorces.
The issue of forced divorce has become one of the hottest debates in Saudi Arabia after several cases have surfaced in recent months. The most controversial case involves Fatima Al-Timani, 34, and her husband Mansour Al-Timani, 37, who were divorced in absentia and against their will. In another case Rania Al-Bouenin and Saud Al-Khaledi also were forced to get divorced on a petition filed in Al-Khobar court by her father.
A squabble erupted when Dr. Ameera Kashgari, an English language professor and columnist, asked Hinaidi how forced divorces affect the development of emerging countries and whether it violates the human rights treaties signed by the Kingdom.
Moderator Alistar Stewart quickly cut her off. Hinaidi, however, attempted to answer the question by noting that Saudi Arabia “is committed to the treaties” it signed and that the government is doing a good job on the issue of human rights.
When pressed to give his own opinions abut such divorce cases, Hinaidi did not answer.
A man in the audience jumped up and asked the same question, noting his concern over the increasing number of forced divorce cases in the judicial system and the consequences of such cases if a divorce is granted.
Hinaidi replied that such cases were not good for society. He also said that the Human Rights Commission was cooperating with the government on the issue and that concerns have been “transferred to the Ministry of Justice.” He did not elaborate on how the Ministry of Justice was going to address the issue.
Hinaidi then told a story of a Saudi woman who fell in love with her driver and fled to the driver’s own country to marry him and to live there without her father’s permission. The father’s only recourse, he said, was to stop financial aid to his daughter and to block her private bank account. The woman has been married for several years and now has three children.
Several audience members complained the woman’s story was not relevant to the issue of forced divorce. Another female audience member accused Hinaidi of not directly answering the questions from the audience, but again Stewart cut off the question.
The session, several members of the audience filed out of the hall complaining that their opportunity to get answers about the issue was foiled by Stewart and Hinaidi’s reluctance to be forthright about his own views as a human rights representative.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
SAY 'NO' TO FORCED DIVORCE - 'YES' REFORMS
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED ASK, why are [adult] [sane] unmarried female women, although they can receive education, hold jobs, own property, give birth, etc., restricted by guardianship that suffers in its effectiveness in providing for the best interest of the person being 'guarded' or 'protected' as a result of the 'trickle-down' effect as the family lineage moves from father, to brother, to half-brother, to cousin, to first cousin, to second cousin, to third cousin, to fourth cousin, etc…
WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST, that the laws mandating guardianship over women be reviewed, modified, implemented and provision made for their enforcement providing for the bona-fide best interest of all female citizens, with particular modifications to be made providing alternate choices for women who have reached the age of emancipation, who have been divorced and/or widowed, or who may otherwise be without an immediate male family member (father or brother) qualified to serve in the role of guardian. The panel overseeing the review of guardianship law should also be comprised in equal shares of men and women. There is no room in this provision for women to have to deal with, or suffer as a result of, self-serving, non-immediate family members who are insincere about providing for, or protecting the best interest of female family members under their guardianship.
WE HEREBY AFFIRM, that this Petition will remain open until such time as the global community is provided with visible manifestation that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has written, revised, implemented and provided for the enforcement of, the requests made herein.
SIGN THE PETITION HERE:
http://www.petitiononline.com/no24orce/petition-sign.html
Aishah Schwartz, Founder and Director, Muslimah Writers Alliance weighing in on Saudi Arabia and the issue of human rights within the Kingdom.
"In the 'Kingdom of Humanity' and under the guise if the 'Religion of Peace, Mercy and Understanding, how does the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia purport to defend the abuse of GOD given rights, when we see the government of the birthplace of Islam doing nothing to reverse the travesty of justice otherwise known as forced divorce?"
"While the Kingdom's more recent (under King Abdullah) efforts in the area of human rights may be commendable, numerous human rights organizations keep playing the 'international law does not allow' card, in complaining about the Kingdom's continued inadequacies in the area of human rights. However, the fact is that Saudi Arabia HAS NOT signed either the 'The International Human Rights Declaration' or the 'International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights' (reasons for abstention highlighted here: http://muslimahwritersalliance.com/files/saudi_human_rights_memo.htm) AND even though Saudi Arabia is "listed" as a signing state to the The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), (another human rights protection document), adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly, often described as an international bill of rights for women, they also filed 'declarations or reservations' stating that: 'In case of contradiction between any term of the Convention and the norms of Islamic law, the Kingdom is not under obligation to observe the contradictory terms of the Convention.' Now, how a reservation statement such as this can still qualify them as being a listed participant of the Convention I'll never understand," Schwartz concluded.
Post a Comment