FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-044-2007
SRI LANKA: Ms. Rizana Nafeek's appeal still pending at the Saudi Court
(Hong Kong, October 12, 2007)
According to the law firm Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari, the appeal filed on behalf of Ms. Rizana Nafeek who was sentenced to capital punishment by a Saudi Court is still pending and it will take some time before the appeal is heard. The firm is representing Ms. Rizana in the appeal.
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) was briefed by the law firm yesterday, October 11, 2007. Razina is a 17-year-old Sri Lankan who was sentenced for capital punishment in Saudi Arabia.
"The AHRC has contacted the lawyers in Saudi Arabia after being alerted about some false rumours spread by some persons in Sri Lanka about this case..." said Mr. Basil Fernando, the Executive Director of the AHRC.
The lawyers have made a detailed appeal with many grounds which they believe are very strong reasons for the lower court sentence to be reversed, he added.
"Several Muslim scholars who were contacted by the AHRC has also confirmed that even under the Sharia law, the death sentence is erroneous on many grounds. Many principles are available within the Shariah law to provide substantive and procedural justice of persons facing criminal trial..." Mr. Fernando said.
Rizana was sentenced to death by a Saudi Court due to some allegations of causing death of a four-month-old baby of her employer while in fact she was in no way responsible for the accidental death which has occurred while the baby was being bottle-fed.
Many agencies have made several appeals to the Saudi authorities to exercise clemency and to pardon Rizana Nafeek.
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-10-12
Back to [2007 AHRC Press Releases]
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Regarding the legal fees for Rizana's appeal
WORLD: AHRC thanks those who have contributed to raise the legal fees the appeal of Rizana Nafeek
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-027-2007
WORLD: AHRC thanks those who have contributed to raise the legal fees the appeal of Rizana Nafeek
(Hong Kong, July 23, 2007)
The Asian Human Rights Commission is happy to announce that the money needed for the legal fees have now been received and wishes to thank all contributors, as well as those who took an active part in canvassing of support for this case.
The required sum of US$ 40,000 was received within a very short time from a number of concerned organisations and persons. The AHRC sees in this spontaneous reaction of concerned persons, an international understanding of the gravity of the problems involved in this case, as well as an active opposition to the continued use of the death sentence as a punishment, in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
The appeal on behalf of Rizana Nafeek has also received overwhelming response and the AHRC further calls upon everyone to continue with their efforts to make appeals, both to the government of Saudi Arabia and to the family of the deceased child for clemency. The references to appeals are given below.
The AHRC has also appealed to the Muslim scholars on the issues involved in this case and we are confident that there will be serious reflections on these issues. For the issues raised please see: http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1122/
We take this opportunity to particularly thank the Honourable Ambassador of Sri Lanka to Saudi Arabia, Mr. A.M.J. Sadiq, for the very proactive role he has played in securing legal assistance in this case and his attempts to secure freedom for the Sri Lankan teenaged facing this problem. We have written to the Sri Lankan government on this issue and you may kindly see this Open Letter at: http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2006statements/1127/
The AHRC will keep the global community updated on the developments in this case.
For information on this appeal:
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1116/
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2007/2477/
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE230262007
http://www.petitiononline.com/rizana1/
WORLD: AHRC makes the initial deposit of the legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Nafeek against the death sentence in Saudi Arabia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-025-2007
WORLD: AHRC makes the initial deposit of the legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Nafeek against the death sentence in Saudi Arabia
(Hong Kong, July 11, 2007)
“As the deadline for the filing of the appeal, which is July 16, is approaching rapidly, and as the Sri Lankan government has not lived up to its obligation of defending the rights of its citizens to a fair trial by providing funds for the appeal, the Asian Human Rights Commission has deposited the initial legal fees for the filing of the appeal, which is Rs. 1.5 Million, the equivalent of Saudi Riyals (SAR) 50,000 with the firm of Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari, Attorneys at Law. We hope that this firm can now proceed to file the papers before the deadline,” stated Mr. Basil Fernando, Executive Director of the Asian Human Rights Commission.
Mr. Fernando further stated that the AHRC is doing this on behalf of the many groups and persons who have taken an active interest in this appeal and who want to assist.
He further stated that payments were made after receiving a letter from the Honourable Ambassador for Sri Lanka in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which stated as follows:
“I refer to the letter from AHRC dated 9th July on the above subject.
I forwarded the letter immediately to the Foreign Ministry in Colombo and sought their advice. The Ministry has informed that there is no objection to the AHRC undertaking the legal expenses to file the judicial appeal on behalf of Sri Lankan national Rizana Nafeek, who has been sentenced to death by the Dawadami High Court last month. The Ministry has further instructed this Mission to facilitate this endeavour.”
Fernando further said that although this action was taken in order to prevent the desperate situation that might arise in the event of the non filing of the appeal, the failure of the Sri Lankan government to live up to its obligations towards the basic protection of its migrant workers in the Middle East and elsewhere, needs to be questioned and the government should be pressurised into changing its policy relating to such protection.
Fernando went on to say that it is tremendously depressing and counterproductive to read some of the statements attributed to ministers of the government and published in several Sri Lankan newspapers. Some of these statements have referred to the payment of blood money for the family of the deceased infant. In fact, at no stage has there been any request from this family for any such payment. These statements regarding blood money are not based on fact and are pure fabrications. In fact, such statements can be extremely counterproductive to the appeals made by thousands of persons from around the world to this family to grant pardon to the teenager on compassionate grounds. A large number of appeals have been sent to the Sri Lankan embassy in Riyadh to be presented to the family. An appeal has also been made to the Muslim scholars across the globe to make their intervention in this case on the basis of compassionate understanding.
The Asian Human Rights Commission encourages everyone to participate in the campaign against the death sentence of Rizana Nafeek.
For further details please follow these links:
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2006/2477/
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2006statements/1111/
SRI LANKA: Government has not approved payment of legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Naffeek facing a death sentence in Saudi Arabia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-024-2007
SRI LANKA: Government has not approved payment of legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Naffeek facing a death sentence in Saudi Arabia
(Hong Kong, July 9, 2007)
The Asian Human Rights Commission wrote to the Sri Lankan ambassador in Saudi Arabia requesting him to urge the Sri Lankan government to make payment for the filing of the appeal on behalf of Rizana Naffeek, the deadline for which is July 16, 2007.
Moon Jeong Ho, programme coordinator of the Urgent Appeals programme of the Asian Human Rights Commission stated, “There is ground for concern as the deadline for filing the appeal is approaching. The Sri Lankan government has not made a decision to pay the legal costs, nor has it replied to others who have volunteered to help in this matter. Given the past experience of four other Sri Lankan who faced the death sentence in Saudi Arabia without any legal assistance being given to them, there is good reason for worry.”
The AHRC in its letter mentioned that in the Sri Lankan embassy’s Media Release it is stated that:
“….the amount of the fees demanded by the Saudi Arabian legal firm as SAR 150,000 (US$ 40,000). While you have demanded an extension of the deadline for the filing of the appeal from the date of your embassy receiving all relevant documents for the appeal form the Saudi court, the legally due date for filing remains as July 16. Since there has not yet been an official confirmation of any extension, legally speaking the possibility of carrying out the execution, if the appeal is not filed on July 16, remains. As such a more cautious approach would be to request the legal firm, which is to handle this appeal, also to undertake the obtaining of papers and doing whatever is needed to get an extension through the courts. However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Colombo has not yet clarified the matter regarding the payment of the legal fees of the firm by the government. There have been some media reports in Sri Lanka in which some ministers have stated that the government is still considering the matter. Even despite of the approaching deadline there has not been any attempt on the part of the Sri Lankan government to deal with this matter.”
The letter further states that despite of communications to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to take steps to enable others who have volunteered to help with finances, no response has been received the ministry in Colombo.
“We therefore urge your embassy to settle this matter with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and to let us know if you will request for financial assistance from other sources. I am giving you the assurance that, on receipt of confirmation of this matter, the AHRC will deposit the initial sum of SAR 50,000 in favour of the legal firm so that they can begin their work forthwith.”
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-07-09
Back to [2007 AHRC Press Releases]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-027-2007
WORLD: AHRC thanks those who have contributed to raise the legal fees the appeal of Rizana Nafeek
(Hong Kong, July 23, 2007)
The Asian Human Rights Commission is happy to announce that the money needed for the legal fees have now been received and wishes to thank all contributors, as well as those who took an active part in canvassing of support for this case.
The required sum of US$ 40,000 was received within a very short time from a number of concerned organisations and persons. The AHRC sees in this spontaneous reaction of concerned persons, an international understanding of the gravity of the problems involved in this case, as well as an active opposition to the continued use of the death sentence as a punishment, in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere.
The appeal on behalf of Rizana Nafeek has also received overwhelming response and the AHRC further calls upon everyone to continue with their efforts to make appeals, both to the government of Saudi Arabia and to the family of the deceased child for clemency. The references to appeals are given below.
The AHRC has also appealed to the Muslim scholars on the issues involved in this case and we are confident that there will be serious reflections on these issues. For the issues raised please see: http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1122/
We take this opportunity to particularly thank the Honourable Ambassador of Sri Lanka to Saudi Arabia, Mr. A.M.J. Sadiq, for the very proactive role he has played in securing legal assistance in this case and his attempts to secure freedom for the Sri Lankan teenaged facing this problem. We have written to the Sri Lankan government on this issue and you may kindly see this Open Letter at: http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2006statements/1127/
The AHRC will keep the global community updated on the developments in this case.
For information on this appeal:
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1116/
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2007/2477/
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE230262007
http://www.petitiononline.com/rizana1/
WORLD: AHRC makes the initial deposit of the legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Nafeek against the death sentence in Saudi Arabia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-025-2007
WORLD: AHRC makes the initial deposit of the legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Nafeek against the death sentence in Saudi Arabia
(Hong Kong, July 11, 2007)
“As the deadline for the filing of the appeal, which is July 16, is approaching rapidly, and as the Sri Lankan government has not lived up to its obligation of defending the rights of its citizens to a fair trial by providing funds for the appeal, the Asian Human Rights Commission has deposited the initial legal fees for the filing of the appeal, which is Rs. 1.5 Million, the equivalent of Saudi Riyals (SAR) 50,000 with the firm of Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari, Attorneys at Law. We hope that this firm can now proceed to file the papers before the deadline,” stated Mr. Basil Fernando, Executive Director of the Asian Human Rights Commission.
Mr. Fernando further stated that the AHRC is doing this on behalf of the many groups and persons who have taken an active interest in this appeal and who want to assist.
He further stated that payments were made after receiving a letter from the Honourable Ambassador for Sri Lanka in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which stated as follows:
“I refer to the letter from AHRC dated 9th July on the above subject.
I forwarded the letter immediately to the Foreign Ministry in Colombo and sought their advice. The Ministry has informed that there is no objection to the AHRC undertaking the legal expenses to file the judicial appeal on behalf of Sri Lankan national Rizana Nafeek, who has been sentenced to death by the Dawadami High Court last month. The Ministry has further instructed this Mission to facilitate this endeavour.”
Fernando further said that although this action was taken in order to prevent the desperate situation that might arise in the event of the non filing of the appeal, the failure of the Sri Lankan government to live up to its obligations towards the basic protection of its migrant workers in the Middle East and elsewhere, needs to be questioned and the government should be pressurised into changing its policy relating to such protection.
Fernando went on to say that it is tremendously depressing and counterproductive to read some of the statements attributed to ministers of the government and published in several Sri Lankan newspapers. Some of these statements have referred to the payment of blood money for the family of the deceased infant. In fact, at no stage has there been any request from this family for any such payment. These statements regarding blood money are not based on fact and are pure fabrications. In fact, such statements can be extremely counterproductive to the appeals made by thousands of persons from around the world to this family to grant pardon to the teenager on compassionate grounds. A large number of appeals have been sent to the Sri Lankan embassy in Riyadh to be presented to the family. An appeal has also been made to the Muslim scholars across the globe to make their intervention in this case on the basis of compassionate understanding.
The Asian Human Rights Commission encourages everyone to participate in the campaign against the death sentence of Rizana Nafeek.
For further details please follow these links:
http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2006/2477/
http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2006statements/1111/
SRI LANKA: Government has not approved payment of legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Naffeek facing a death sentence in Saudi Arabia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
AHRC-PL-024-2007
SRI LANKA: Government has not approved payment of legal fees for the appeal of Rizana Naffeek facing a death sentence in Saudi Arabia
(Hong Kong, July 9, 2007)
The Asian Human Rights Commission wrote to the Sri Lankan ambassador in Saudi Arabia requesting him to urge the Sri Lankan government to make payment for the filing of the appeal on behalf of Rizana Naffeek, the deadline for which is July 16, 2007.
Moon Jeong Ho, programme coordinator of the Urgent Appeals programme of the Asian Human Rights Commission stated, “There is ground for concern as the deadline for filing the appeal is approaching. The Sri Lankan government has not made a decision to pay the legal costs, nor has it replied to others who have volunteered to help in this matter. Given the past experience of four other Sri Lankan who faced the death sentence in Saudi Arabia without any legal assistance being given to them, there is good reason for worry.”
The AHRC in its letter mentioned that in the Sri Lankan embassy’s Media Release it is stated that:
“….the amount of the fees demanded by the Saudi Arabian legal firm as SAR 150,000 (US$ 40,000). While you have demanded an extension of the deadline for the filing of the appeal from the date of your embassy receiving all relevant documents for the appeal form the Saudi court, the legally due date for filing remains as July 16. Since there has not yet been an official confirmation of any extension, legally speaking the possibility of carrying out the execution, if the appeal is not filed on July 16, remains. As such a more cautious approach would be to request the legal firm, which is to handle this appeal, also to undertake the obtaining of papers and doing whatever is needed to get an extension through the courts. However, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Colombo has not yet clarified the matter regarding the payment of the legal fees of the firm by the government. There have been some media reports in Sri Lanka in which some ministers have stated that the government is still considering the matter. Even despite of the approaching deadline there has not been any attempt on the part of the Sri Lankan government to deal with this matter.”
The letter further states that despite of communications to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to take steps to enable others who have volunteered to help with finances, no response has been received the ministry in Colombo.
“We therefore urge your embassy to settle this matter with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and to let us know if you will request for financial assistance from other sources. I am giving you the assurance that, on receipt of confirmation of this matter, the AHRC will deposit the initial sum of SAR 50,000 in favour of the legal firm so that they can begin their work forthwith.”
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-07-09
Back to [2007 AHRC Press Releases]
Sri Lanka must ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL UPDATE ON URGENT APPEAL
ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME
Update on Urgent Appeal
25 July 2007
[RE: UP-097-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: Your urgent intervention is needed to save Rizana Nafeek who must appeal against the death sentence before 16 July 2007; UG-004-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: A Special Appeal under Extraordinary Circumstances for Nafeek Rizana; UP-093-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: Please immediately write to the Sri Lankan Ministry of Foreign Affairs to save the life of its citizen; UA-207-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: Death sentence to young girl requires urgent intervention by the Sri Lankan government]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-104-2007: SRI LANKA: Sri Lanka must ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
SRI LANKA: Legal protection; treaties
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has previously informed you through several appeals regarding the case of Ms. Rizana Nafeek who is facing the death sentence by beheading in Saudi Arabia and who has now succeed in filing an appeal before the Supreme Court in Saudi Arabia with the help of several financial donors. Even though the initial stage for her appeal before the Court has been launched, the possibilities of other Sri Lankan migrant workers facing similar situations such as the death sentence or rigorous imprisonment still exist because the legal protection that should be provided by their government is not guaranteed due to the government's failure to ratify the international law able to protect its citizen.
As many appeals are proceeding on behalf of Ms. Rizana Nafeek and also as an appeal has been lodged in the Dawadami Court, several other important matters regarding the protection of migrant workers, like Rizana, have come to the forefront of the public debate.
One such issue is the need for the Sri Lankan government to ratify the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes associated with the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. While many countries in a similar situation as Sri Lanka have signed this Optional Protocol, including Sri Lanka's neighbouring countries of India, Pakistan and Nepal, Sri Lanka has not yet done so.
Ratification of this Optional Protocol will bring many benefits to Sri Lanka and in particular, the migrant workers who are in employed in countries where certain laws and procedures may not be in conformity with international norms and standards, thereby permitting disputes to arise that require compulsory settlement. The beheading the four Sri Lankan earlier, the situation faced by Rizana Nafeek at present, and many other persons in many places in the Middle East in particular, raises the need for protective measures to be taken. One such measure is the signing of this particular protocol.
Sri Lanka acceded to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in May, 2006. During this time there was a public outcry arising out the problem faced by three Sri Lankan who were facing the death sentence and another facing 15 years of rigorous imprisonment in Saudi Arabia. As a result of this outcry the government acceded to the Convention but did not proceed at the same time to ratify the Optional Protocol concerning Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, which would have provided the government with several advantages in dealing with these cases.
Though the government has acceded to the Vienna Convention, it has not yet put in place a system to exercise its rights under this convention to promptly arrange for the legal representation of its nationals in foreign custody. Such right to intervene for legal representation already exists as Sri Lanka now is a signatory to the convention.
To gain further advantage Sri Lanka should promptly ratify the Optional Protocol mentioned above.
For further information on the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations please see these links:
http://www.dailymirror.lk/2005/04/08/opinion/1.asp
http://www.dailymirror.lk/2007/07/23/opinion/02.asp
For details of the case, please see: UA-207-2007, UP-093-2007, AHRC-OL-022-2007, UG-004-2007, AS-155-2007, AS-156-2007, UP-097-2007, AS-158-2007, AS-160-2007, AS-163-2007, AS-162-2007, AS-165-2007, AS-169-2007, AHRC-OL-023-2007.
__________________________
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write a letter to the Sri Lankan authorities requesting the urgent ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes.
Suggested letter:
Dear ___________,
SRI LANKA: Sri Lanka must ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
I am writing to bring to your notice the need to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. This need is very much highlighted by the four Sri Lankans who were beheaded and the teenager who is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, Rizana Nafeek.
I urge the government to ratify the said protocol and make available to itself the provisions within the Protocol for intervention on matters of national interest and particularly on matters relating to the lives and liberties of all Sri Lankans.
Yours sincerely,
----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. His Excellency the Hon. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse
President Socialist Democratic Republic of Sri Lanka
C/- Office of the President
Temple Trees, 150, Galle Road
Colombo 3
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2472100 / 2446657
Email: secretary@presidentsoffice.lk
2. Dr. Palitha T.B. Kohona
Secretary / Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic Building
Colombo 01
Sri Lanka
Fax: 94-11-5357407 / 2446091 / 2333450
Email: sfa@formin.gov.lk
3. Mr. C.R. De Silva
Attorney General
Attorney General's Department
Colombo 12
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 436421
Email: attorney@sri.lanka.net
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)
Posted on 2007-07-25
ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME
Update on Urgent Appeal
25 July 2007
[RE: UP-097-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: Your urgent intervention is needed to save Rizana Nafeek who must appeal against the death sentence before 16 July 2007; UG-004-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: A Special Appeal under Extraordinary Circumstances for Nafeek Rizana; UP-093-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: Please immediately write to the Sri Lankan Ministry of Foreign Affairs to save the life of its citizen; UA-207-2007: SAUDI ARABIA/SRI LANKA: Death sentence to young girl requires urgent intervention by the Sri Lankan government]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UP-104-2007: SRI LANKA: Sri Lanka must ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
SRI LANKA: Legal protection; treaties
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear friends,
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has previously informed you through several appeals regarding the case of Ms. Rizana Nafeek who is facing the death sentence by beheading in Saudi Arabia and who has now succeed in filing an appeal before the Supreme Court in Saudi Arabia with the help of several financial donors. Even though the initial stage for her appeal before the Court has been launched, the possibilities of other Sri Lankan migrant workers facing similar situations such as the death sentence or rigorous imprisonment still exist because the legal protection that should be provided by their government is not guaranteed due to the government's failure to ratify the international law able to protect its citizen.
As many appeals are proceeding on behalf of Ms. Rizana Nafeek and also as an appeal has been lodged in the Dawadami Court, several other important matters regarding the protection of migrant workers, like Rizana, have come to the forefront of the public debate.
One such issue is the need for the Sri Lankan government to ratify the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes associated with the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. While many countries in a similar situation as Sri Lanka have signed this Optional Protocol, including Sri Lanka's neighbouring countries of India, Pakistan and Nepal, Sri Lanka has not yet done so.
Ratification of this Optional Protocol will bring many benefits to Sri Lanka and in particular, the migrant workers who are in employed in countries where certain laws and procedures may not be in conformity with international norms and standards, thereby permitting disputes to arise that require compulsory settlement. The beheading the four Sri Lankan earlier, the situation faced by Rizana Nafeek at present, and many other persons in many places in the Middle East in particular, raises the need for protective measures to be taken. One such measure is the signing of this particular protocol.
Sri Lanka acceded to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations in May, 2006. During this time there was a public outcry arising out the problem faced by three Sri Lankan who were facing the death sentence and another facing 15 years of rigorous imprisonment in Saudi Arabia. As a result of this outcry the government acceded to the Convention but did not proceed at the same time to ratify the Optional Protocol concerning Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, which would have provided the government with several advantages in dealing with these cases.
Though the government has acceded to the Vienna Convention, it has not yet put in place a system to exercise its rights under this convention to promptly arrange for the legal representation of its nationals in foreign custody. Such right to intervene for legal representation already exists as Sri Lanka now is a signatory to the convention.
To gain further advantage Sri Lanka should promptly ratify the Optional Protocol mentioned above.
For further information on the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations please see these links:
http://www.dailymirror.lk/2005/04/08/opinion/1.asp
http://www.dailymirror.lk/2007/07/23/opinion/02.asp
For details of the case, please see: UA-207-2007, UP-093-2007, AHRC-OL-022-2007, UG-004-2007, AS-155-2007, AS-156-2007, UP-097-2007, AS-158-2007, AS-160-2007, AS-163-2007, AS-162-2007, AS-165-2007, AS-169-2007, AHRC-OL-023-2007.
__________________________
SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write a letter to the Sri Lankan authorities requesting the urgent ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes.
Suggested letter:
Dear ___________,
SRI LANKA: Sri Lanka must ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
I am writing to bring to your notice the need to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. This need is very much highlighted by the four Sri Lankans who were beheaded and the teenager who is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, Rizana Nafeek.
I urge the government to ratify the said protocol and make available to itself the provisions within the Protocol for intervention on matters of national interest and particularly on matters relating to the lives and liberties of all Sri Lankans.
Yours sincerely,
----------------
PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:
1. His Excellency the Hon. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse
President Socialist Democratic Republic of Sri Lanka
C/- Office of the President
Temple Trees, 150, Galle Road
Colombo 3
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2472100 / 2446657
Email: secretary@presidentsoffice.lk
2. Dr. Palitha T.B. Kohona
Secretary / Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic Building
Colombo 01
Sri Lanka
Fax: 94-11-5357407 / 2446091 / 2333450
Email: sfa@formin.gov.lk
3. Mr. C.R. De Silva
Attorney General
Attorney General's Department
Colombo 12
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2 436421
Email: attorney@sri.lanka.net
Thank you.
Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)
Posted on 2007-07-25
Friday, December 7, 2007
An Open Letter to His Excellency the President of Sri Lankan
[AHRC Open Letter] WORLD: An Open Letter to His Excellency the President of Sri Lankan on matters relating to the case of Rizana Nafeek and an appreciation of the role of the Sri Lankan Ambassador in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 23, 2007
AHRC-OL-023-2007
An Open Letter to His Excellency the President of Sri Lankan on matters relating to the case of Rizana Nafeek and an appreciation of the role of the Sri Lankan Ambassador in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
His Excellency the Hon. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse
President Socialist Democratic Republic of Sri Lanka
C/- Office of the President
Temple Trees, 150, Galle Road
Colombo 3
SRI LANKA
Fax: +94 11 2472100 / +94 11 2446657
Email: secretary@presidentsoffice.lk
Your Excellency,
Re: Matters relating to the case of Rizana Nafeek and an appreciation of the role of the Sri Lankan Ambassador in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
I am writing to you regarding several matters relating to the case of Rizana Nafeek, who is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia and on whose behalf an appeal has now been lodged.
I am happy to inform you that the Asian Human Rights Commission received overwhelming support from persons and organisations, both in Sri Lanka and outside, who have contributed to the legal fees needed to retain Messers Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari – Attorneys-at-Law, to represent Rizana Nafeek in the Dawadami Courts. The legal firm has acted promptly after being retained; they visited the Dawadami Prison and obtained the power of attorney from Rizana and filed the preliminary papers for her appeal. Thus, her death sentence will now remain suspended until the final outcome of the appeal.
Messers Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari are now preparing a more detailed appeal, taking into consideration all the circumstances of this case from every possible angle. There is good reason to hope that this appeal will succeed and that Rizana Nafeek will be able to return, safely to her home.
The Asian Human Rights Commission has also sought advice from Muslim scholars from around the world on several issues relating to this appeal. They are: the value attached to a confession obtained under duress; the legal implications of the accused being a minor at the time of the alleged commission of the offense; the manner in which the mental element of a crime is assessed under Islamic law in general and in particular in the circumstances of this case; the right of an accused to legal representation at a trial in which the alleged crime carries the possibility of capital punishment; the rights of an alien who is unaware of the law, the language and the culture of the receiving country to have assistance in order that he or she may participate in the trial with adequate comprehension of what is going on and the issue of proportionality of punishment as compared to the offense. We are hopeful that we will get feedback on these issues, which, hopefully, will help in her appeal.
I am also happy to inform you that globally, the plea on behalf of this teenager received overwhelming support. Literally, thousands of letters have been written, seeking clemency on her behalf, to the Saudi Arabian government as well as to the family of the deceased infant, who have the preeminent right to pardon Rizana Nafeek. The global media has also given extensive and sympathetic coverage to the plight of this young girl.
The Asian Human Rights Commission takes this opportunity to compliment and to express appreciation of the excellent intervention of the Ambassador of Sri Lanka in Riyadh, the Hon. A.M.J. Sadiq for making it possible for us to contribute the legal fees in this case and in other ways to help in the case of this young Sri Lankan teenager.
On July 9, 2007 the Asian Human Rights Commission wrote to the Ambassador expressing the AHRC’s willingness to undertake the cost of this appeal, which the Sri Lankan Ambassador had taken up with Your Excellency’s government and we received the following reply from him on the very same day:
I forwarded the letter immediately to the Foreign Ministry in Colombo and sought their advice. The Ministry has informed that there is no objection to the AHRC undertaking the legal expenses to file the judicial appeal on behalf of Sri Lankan national Rizana Nafeek, who has been sentenced to death by the Dawadami High Court last month. The Ministry has further instructed this Mission to facilitate this endeavour.
On the basis of the Ambassador’s letter to us, referred to above, the very next day the Asian Human Rights Commission deposited the required initial fees in favour of Messers Kateb Fahad Al-Shammari and the legal firm immediately took steps to file the appeal. In recognising the Ambassador’s role in this matter the Asian Human Rights Commission wrote to the Ambassador stating our appreciation thus:
I am also taking this opportunity to express my appreciation of your handling of a very complex and delicate situation so competently. You have managed to combine conscience with diplomacy and been able to harness the support of various elements that, unfortunately, do not often get the chance to collaborate constructively for the common good. While Rizana Nafeek’s case is very important in saving her life, I am sure it will also go towards establishing a principle of the duties owed to migrant workers, not only by the government, but also civil society.
The Sunday Times on July 22, 2007, reported that the Ambassador has been recalled. It is not our intention to comment on the internal matters of the government; however, we are concerned that the case of Rizana Nafeek can be adversely affected in the circumstances. It has become possible on this occasion; unlike in the situation of the four persons who were beheaded earlier, to take some appropriate legal action and, in fact, this occasion should be used as a lesson on how to deal with similar situations in the future. We understand that there are other Sri Lankans facing rather serious problems before Saudi Arabian courts.
Under these circumstances we would suggest the government of Sri Lanka to review its policy regarding the legal protection that should be available to Sri Lankan citizens who work as migrant workers abroad. Already, several suggestions have been made from many sources that the relevant international agreements should be signed between Saudi Arabia and Sri Lanka (as well as in other countries where Sri Lankan migrant workers are employed), to secure their rights once they face criminal charges or punishments. Such agreements can make it possible for the Sri Lankan government to prosecute or punish these cases under Sri Lankan law and, in case they are tried in a foreign land, to ensure that they get proper legal representation through the services of the receiving country. Until such agreements are arrived at the Sri Lankan government should provide such services and seek, if necessary, the services of other citizens and organisations, local or international to assist the government in this regard.
We hope that the case of Rizana Nafeek will awaken the government, as well as the citizens and all persons concerned with the welfare of the migrant workers and their human rights, to take the necessary action to be able to provide effective services for persons who may face difficult problems abroad in the future.
Assuring you of our highest cooperation on all matters relating to the protection and promotion of human rights, of all Sri Lankan citizens, I remain,
Yours sincerely,
Basil Fernando
Executive Director
Asian Human Rights Commission
cc: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sri Lanka
Posted on 2007-07-23
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
WORLD: An appeal to Muslim scholars throughout the world
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AS-155-2007
July 6, 2007
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
WORLD: An appeal to Muslim scholars throughout the world
(The case of a teenage girl facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia as the result of a tragedy being misunderstood as a crime)
The Asian Human Rights Commission is writing this appeal to all the Muslim scholars in the world regarding the case that the AHRC believes deserves of all Muslim scholars.
This is a case where a teenage girl, who was in charge of bottle feeding a four-month old child, which due to her inexperience resulted in an accident of the child choking and while she was desperately trying to help by way of soothing and stroking the chest, face and neck of the baby a tragic death took place. These circumstances are explained below. However, due to misunderstandings this case was presented as the murder of a baby by strangulation and the teenager was sentenced to death by a court in Saudi Arabia on June, 16.
After careful consideration of all facts we are of the view that what has happened is an enormous tragedy but it can lead to, if not prevented soon, a further tragedy of an innocent inexperienced teenager being executed.
We believe that this is a case in which scholarly considerations can help to make the necessary reflections distinguishing a tragedy from a crime and from such reflections interventions can be made to prevent a further tragedy taking place. We believe that the Muslim scholars, if they think it appropriate can communicate with this unfortunate family, faced with this situation to provide them with wise advise to help them deal with this issue.
Details of the relevant incidents:
This case concerns Naffeek Rizana who is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, allegedly for the strangulation of a four month old baby. Through close study of the case the Asian Human Rights Commission is satisfied that, in fact, what has taken place was the tragic death of a baby in the process of being fed by an inexperienced teenager.
Naffeek Rizana was born on February 4, 1988 and comes from a war-torn, impoverished village. Here, many families, including those of the Muslim community try to send their under aged children for employment outside the country, as their breadwinners. Some employment agencies exploit the situation of the impoverished families to recruit under aged girls for employment. For that purpose they engage in obtaining passports by altering the dates of birth of these children to make it appear that they are older than they really are. In the case of Naffeek Rizana, the altered date, which is to be found in her passport now, is February 2, 1982. It was on the basis of this altered date that the employment agency fixed her employment in Saudi Arabia and she went there in May, 2005.
Later in 2007 she went to work at the house of Mr. Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi whose wife had a new-born baby boy. A short time after she started working for this family she was assigned to bottle feed the infant who was by then four months old. Naffeek Rizana had no experience of any sort in caring for such a young infant. She was left alone when bottle feeding the child. While she was feeding the child the boy started choking, as so often happens to babies and Naffeek Rizana panicked and while shouting for help tried to sooth the child by feeling the chest, neck and face, doing whatever she could to help him. At her shouting the mother arrived but by that time the baby was either unconscious or dead. Unfortunately, misunderstanding the situation the family members treated the teenager very harshly and handed her over to the police, accusing her of strangling the baby. At the police station also, she was very harshly handled and did not have the help of a translator or anyone else to whom she could explain what had happened. She was made to sign a confession and later charges were filed in court of murder by strangulation.
On her first appearance in court she was sternly warned by the police to repeat her confession, which she did. However, later she was able to talk to an interpreter who was sent by the Sri Lankan embassy and she explained in her own language the circumstances of what had happened as stated above. This version was also stated in court thereafter.
According to reports, the judges who heard the case requested the father of the child to use his prerogative to pardon the young girl. However, the father refused to grant such pardon. On that basis the court sentenced her to death by beheading. This sentence was made on June 16, 2007.
There is a period of one month for the lodging of an appeal. However, an appeal has not yet been lodged. The initiative for lodging the appeal is with the Sri Lankan government. The AHRC also understands that the Sri Lankan authorities have sought the help of a legal firm which had initially demanded the equivalent of US$ 160,000. In the initially reports in the media there were different figures quoted. However, this matter has now been clarified. The Foreign Ministry in Colombo, Sri Lanka has not authorised such money and the family of Naffeek Rizana is of course unable to raise any funds for her appeal. This matter of legal assistance is being pursued with the government at the moment.
However, under Saudi Arabian law it is the prerogative of the family of the victim, in this case the parents of the baby that has the right to pardon the teenaged, Naffeek Rizana. Such pardon will be valid in law under the Saudi Arabian legal system.
The Asian Human Rights Commission is of the view that was has happened is a tragedy and not a crime. At no stage was any allegation made of any animosity between the teenaged helper and the family. If such animosity existed it is very unlikely that a four month old infant would have been handed over to her care. The inexperience of the helper, as well as the difficulties of communication due to the language problems have ended up in an extremely unfortunate situation being misunderstood as a crime. If the nature of this tragedy is not dealt with within a matter of days from now there will be a further tragedy of a teenaged, inexperienced helper being given capital punishment for a crime she did not commit or intend to commit.
Contact details of the family:
Those scholars who wish to offer their advice to the family may do so through the following address c/o the Sri Lankan Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mr. Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi
Ministry of Finance, Riyadh
C/O Sri Lankan Embassy
P.O. Box 94360
Riyadh 19693
Saudi Arabia
lankaemb@shabakah.net.sa, amjsadiqu@hotmail.com
For a sample letter written by the Asian Human Rights Commission to the family please see below:
Dear Mr. Otaibi,
May the peace of God be upon you during this time of grief in your family. I wish to express my heartfelt condolences to you and your wife over the loss of your child.
The loss of any life is a tragedy, and it is in this spirit that I share with you my concerns for the life of the teenage girl Naffeek Rizana.
Naffeek Rizana comes from an extremely poor family in the war-torn eastern part of Sri Lanka where many people, including the Muslim community, are facing grave economic and other daily hardships. Due to this, many underage young people are sent to other countries for employment in order to feed their impoverished families.
Naffeek Rizana was born on February 4, 1988. The individuals who recruited her for employment in your country altered her date of birth to February 2, 1982, and obtained a passport for her to travel to Saudi Arabia. At the time of her employment in your household, she was therefore still a teenager without any experience of looking after a baby. My understanding is that her inexperience resulted in the accidental death of your child and that this was not an intentional act to harm your family.
I am therefore writing this letter to appeal to your compassion to pardon and forgive the teenage girl Naffeek Rizana who is now facing a death sentence. It is to your compassion and understanding that I appeal in the hope that you will find it in your heart to forgive this unfortunate girl.
Yours sincerely,
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-07-06
AS-155-2007
July 6, 2007
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
WORLD: An appeal to Muslim scholars throughout the world
(The case of a teenage girl facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia as the result of a tragedy being misunderstood as a crime)
The Asian Human Rights Commission is writing this appeal to all the Muslim scholars in the world regarding the case that the AHRC believes deserves of all Muslim scholars.
This is a case where a teenage girl, who was in charge of bottle feeding a four-month old child, which due to her inexperience resulted in an accident of the child choking and while she was desperately trying to help by way of soothing and stroking the chest, face and neck of the baby a tragic death took place. These circumstances are explained below. However, due to misunderstandings this case was presented as the murder of a baby by strangulation and the teenager was sentenced to death by a court in Saudi Arabia on June, 16.
After careful consideration of all facts we are of the view that what has happened is an enormous tragedy but it can lead to, if not prevented soon, a further tragedy of an innocent inexperienced teenager being executed.
We believe that this is a case in which scholarly considerations can help to make the necessary reflections distinguishing a tragedy from a crime and from such reflections interventions can be made to prevent a further tragedy taking place. We believe that the Muslim scholars, if they think it appropriate can communicate with this unfortunate family, faced with this situation to provide them with wise advise to help them deal with this issue.
Details of the relevant incidents:
This case concerns Naffeek Rizana who is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, allegedly for the strangulation of a four month old baby. Through close study of the case the Asian Human Rights Commission is satisfied that, in fact, what has taken place was the tragic death of a baby in the process of being fed by an inexperienced teenager.
Naffeek Rizana was born on February 4, 1988 and comes from a war-torn, impoverished village. Here, many families, including those of the Muslim community try to send their under aged children for employment outside the country, as their breadwinners. Some employment agencies exploit the situation of the impoverished families to recruit under aged girls for employment. For that purpose they engage in obtaining passports by altering the dates of birth of these children to make it appear that they are older than they really are. In the case of Naffeek Rizana, the altered date, which is to be found in her passport now, is February 2, 1982. It was on the basis of this altered date that the employment agency fixed her employment in Saudi Arabia and she went there in May, 2005.
Later in 2007 she went to work at the house of Mr. Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi whose wife had a new-born baby boy. A short time after she started working for this family she was assigned to bottle feed the infant who was by then four months old. Naffeek Rizana had no experience of any sort in caring for such a young infant. She was left alone when bottle feeding the child. While she was feeding the child the boy started choking, as so often happens to babies and Naffeek Rizana panicked and while shouting for help tried to sooth the child by feeling the chest, neck and face, doing whatever she could to help him. At her shouting the mother arrived but by that time the baby was either unconscious or dead. Unfortunately, misunderstanding the situation the family members treated the teenager very harshly and handed her over to the police, accusing her of strangling the baby. At the police station also, she was very harshly handled and did not have the help of a translator or anyone else to whom she could explain what had happened. She was made to sign a confession and later charges were filed in court of murder by strangulation.
On her first appearance in court she was sternly warned by the police to repeat her confession, which she did. However, later she was able to talk to an interpreter who was sent by the Sri Lankan embassy and she explained in her own language the circumstances of what had happened as stated above. This version was also stated in court thereafter.
According to reports, the judges who heard the case requested the father of the child to use his prerogative to pardon the young girl. However, the father refused to grant such pardon. On that basis the court sentenced her to death by beheading. This sentence was made on June 16, 2007.
There is a period of one month for the lodging of an appeal. However, an appeal has not yet been lodged. The initiative for lodging the appeal is with the Sri Lankan government. The AHRC also understands that the Sri Lankan authorities have sought the help of a legal firm which had initially demanded the equivalent of US$ 160,000. In the initially reports in the media there were different figures quoted. However, this matter has now been clarified. The Foreign Ministry in Colombo, Sri Lanka has not authorised such money and the family of Naffeek Rizana is of course unable to raise any funds for her appeal. This matter of legal assistance is being pursued with the government at the moment.
However, under Saudi Arabian law it is the prerogative of the family of the victim, in this case the parents of the baby that has the right to pardon the teenaged, Naffeek Rizana. Such pardon will be valid in law under the Saudi Arabian legal system.
The Asian Human Rights Commission is of the view that was has happened is a tragedy and not a crime. At no stage was any allegation made of any animosity between the teenaged helper and the family. If such animosity existed it is very unlikely that a four month old infant would have been handed over to her care. The inexperience of the helper, as well as the difficulties of communication due to the language problems have ended up in an extremely unfortunate situation being misunderstood as a crime. If the nature of this tragedy is not dealt with within a matter of days from now there will be a further tragedy of a teenaged, inexperienced helper being given capital punishment for a crime she did not commit or intend to commit.
Contact details of the family:
Those scholars who wish to offer their advice to the family may do so through the following address c/o the Sri Lankan Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mr. Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi
Ministry of Finance, Riyadh
C/O Sri Lankan Embassy
P.O. Box 94360
Riyadh 19693
Saudi Arabia
lankaemb@shabakah.net.sa, amjsadiqu@hotmail.com
For a sample letter written by the Asian Human Rights Commission to the family please see below:
Dear Mr. Otaibi,
May the peace of God be upon you during this time of grief in your family. I wish to express my heartfelt condolences to you and your wife over the loss of your child.
The loss of any life is a tragedy, and it is in this spirit that I share with you my concerns for the life of the teenage girl Naffeek Rizana.
Naffeek Rizana comes from an extremely poor family in the war-torn eastern part of Sri Lanka where many people, including the Muslim community, are facing grave economic and other daily hardships. Due to this, many underage young people are sent to other countries for employment in order to feed their impoverished families.
Naffeek Rizana was born on February 4, 1988. The individuals who recruited her for employment in your country altered her date of birth to February 2, 1982, and obtained a passport for her to travel to Saudi Arabia. At the time of her employment in your household, she was therefore still a teenager without any experience of looking after a baby. My understanding is that her inexperience resulted in the accidental death of your child and that this was not an intentional act to harm your family.
I am therefore writing this letter to appeal to your compassion to pardon and forgive the teenage girl Naffeek Rizana who is now facing a death sentence. It is to your compassion and understanding that I appeal in the hope that you will find it in your heart to forgive this unfortunate girl.
Yours sincerely,
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-07-06
SRI LANKA: The Sri Lankan teenager facing execution in Saudi Arabia: a tragedy misunderstood as a crime
SRI LANKA: The Sri Lankan teenager facing execution in Saudi Arabia: a tragedy misunderstood as a crime
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AS-156-2007
July 6, 2007
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
SRI LANKA: The Sri Lankan teenager facing execution in Saudi Arabia: a tragedy misunderstood as a crime
Naffeek Rizana is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, allegedly for the strangulation of a four month old baby. Through close study of the case the Asian Human Rights Commission is satisfied that, in fact, what has taken place was the tragic death of a baby in the process of being fed by an inexperienced teenager.
Naffeek Rizana was born on February 4, 1988 and comes from a war-torn, impoverished village. Here, many families, including those of the Muslim community try to send their under aged children for employment outside the country, as their breadwinners. Some employment agencies exploit the situation of the impoverished families to recruit under aged girls for employment. For that purpose they engage in obtaining passports by altering the dates of birth of these children to make it appear that they are older than they really are. In the case of Naffeek Rizana, the altered date, which is to be found in her passport now, is February 2, 1982. It was on the basis of this altered date that the employment agency fixed her employment in Saudi Arabia and she went there in May, 2005.
Later in 2007 she went to work at the house of Mr. Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi whose wife had a new-born baby boy. A short time after she started working for this family she was assigned to bottle feed the infant who was by then four months old. Naffeek Rizana had no experience of any sort in caring for such a young infant. She was left alone when bottle feeding the child. While she was feeding the child the boy started choking, as so often happens to babies and Naffeek Rizana panicked and while shouting for help tried to sooth the child by feeling the chest, neck and face, doing whatever she could to help him. At her shouting the mother arrived but by that time the baby was either unconscious or dead. Unfortunately, misunderstanding the situation the family members treated the teenager very harshly and handed her over to the police, accusing her of strangling the baby. At the police station also, she was very harshly handled and did not have the help of a translator or anyone else to whom she could explain what had happened. She was made to sign a confession and later charges were filed in court of murder by strangulation.
On her first appearance in court she was sternly warned by the police to repeat her confession, which she did. However, later she was able to talk to an interpreter who was sent by the Sri Lankan embassy and she explained in her own language the circumstances of what had happened as stated above. This version was also stated in court thereafter.
According to reports, the judges who heard the case requested the father of the child to use his prerogative to pardon the young girl. However, the father refused to grant such pardon. On that basis the court sentenced her to death by beheading. This sentence was made on June 16, 2007.
There is a period of one month for the lodging of an appeal. However, an appeal has not yet been lodged. The initiative for lodging the appeal is with the Sri Lankan government. The AHRC also understands that the Sri Lankan authorities have sought the help of a legal firm which had initially demanded the equivalent of US$ 160,000. In the initially reports in the media there were different figures quoted. However, this matter has now been clarified. The Foreign Ministry in Colombo, Sri Lanka has not authorised such money and the family of Naffeek Rizana is of course unable to raise any funds for her appeal. This matter of legal assistance is being pursued with the government at the moment.
However, under Saudi Arabian law it is the prerogative of the family of the victim, in this case the parents of the baby that has the right to pardon the teenaged, Naffeek Rizana. Such pardon will be valid in law under the Saudi Arabian legal system.
The Asian Human Rights Commission is of the view that was has happened is a tragedy and not a crime. At no stage was any allegation made of any animosity between the teenaged helper and the family. If such animosity existed it is very unlikely that a four month old infant would have been handed over to her care. The inexperience of the helper, as well as the difficulties of communication due to the language problems have ended up in an extremely unfortunate situation being misunderstood as a crime. If the nature of this tragedy is not dealt with within a matter of days from now there will be a further tragedy of a teenaged, inexperienced helper being given capital punishment for a crime she did not commit or intend to commit.
We urge all concerned persons to intervene with the Sri Lankan government, the government of Saudi Arabia and the family of Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi of Saudi Arabia to protect the life of Naffeek Rizana
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-07-06
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AS-156-2007
July 6, 2007
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
SRI LANKA: The Sri Lankan teenager facing execution in Saudi Arabia: a tragedy misunderstood as a crime
Naffeek Rizana is facing the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, allegedly for the strangulation of a four month old baby. Through close study of the case the Asian Human Rights Commission is satisfied that, in fact, what has taken place was the tragic death of a baby in the process of being fed by an inexperienced teenager.
Naffeek Rizana was born on February 4, 1988 and comes from a war-torn, impoverished village. Here, many families, including those of the Muslim community try to send their under aged children for employment outside the country, as their breadwinners. Some employment agencies exploit the situation of the impoverished families to recruit under aged girls for employment. For that purpose they engage in obtaining passports by altering the dates of birth of these children to make it appear that they are older than they really are. In the case of Naffeek Rizana, the altered date, which is to be found in her passport now, is February 2, 1982. It was on the basis of this altered date that the employment agency fixed her employment in Saudi Arabia and she went there in May, 2005.
Later in 2007 she went to work at the house of Mr. Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi whose wife had a new-born baby boy. A short time after she started working for this family she was assigned to bottle feed the infant who was by then four months old. Naffeek Rizana had no experience of any sort in caring for such a young infant. She was left alone when bottle feeding the child. While she was feeding the child the boy started choking, as so often happens to babies and Naffeek Rizana panicked and while shouting for help tried to sooth the child by feeling the chest, neck and face, doing whatever she could to help him. At her shouting the mother arrived but by that time the baby was either unconscious or dead. Unfortunately, misunderstanding the situation the family members treated the teenager very harshly and handed her over to the police, accusing her of strangling the baby. At the police station also, she was very harshly handled and did not have the help of a translator or anyone else to whom she could explain what had happened. She was made to sign a confession and later charges were filed in court of murder by strangulation.
On her first appearance in court she was sternly warned by the police to repeat her confession, which she did. However, later she was able to talk to an interpreter who was sent by the Sri Lankan embassy and she explained in her own language the circumstances of what had happened as stated above. This version was also stated in court thereafter.
According to reports, the judges who heard the case requested the father of the child to use his prerogative to pardon the young girl. However, the father refused to grant such pardon. On that basis the court sentenced her to death by beheading. This sentence was made on June 16, 2007.
There is a period of one month for the lodging of an appeal. However, an appeal has not yet been lodged. The initiative for lodging the appeal is with the Sri Lankan government. The AHRC also understands that the Sri Lankan authorities have sought the help of a legal firm which had initially demanded the equivalent of US$ 160,000. In the initially reports in the media there were different figures quoted. However, this matter has now been clarified. The Foreign Ministry in Colombo, Sri Lanka has not authorised such money and the family of Naffeek Rizana is of course unable to raise any funds for her appeal. This matter of legal assistance is being pursued with the government at the moment.
However, under Saudi Arabian law it is the prerogative of the family of the victim, in this case the parents of the baby that has the right to pardon the teenaged, Naffeek Rizana. Such pardon will be valid in law under the Saudi Arabian legal system.
The Asian Human Rights Commission is of the view that was has happened is a tragedy and not a crime. At no stage was any allegation made of any animosity between the teenaged helper and the family. If such animosity existed it is very unlikely that a four month old infant would have been handed over to her care. The inexperience of the helper, as well as the difficulties of communication due to the language problems have ended up in an extremely unfortunate situation being misunderstood as a crime. If the nature of this tragedy is not dealt with within a matter of days from now there will be a further tragedy of a teenaged, inexperienced helper being given capital punishment for a crime she did not commit or intend to commit.
We urge all concerned persons to intervene with the Sri Lankan government, the government of Saudi Arabia and the family of Naif Jiziyan Khklafal Otaibi of Saudi Arabia to protect the life of Naffeek Rizana
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Posted on 2007-07-06
AHRC Open Letter] SRI LANKA: An Open Letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
[AHRC Open Letter] SRI LANKA: An Open Letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking legal assistance for the young Sri Lankan woman facing the death sentence by beheading in Saudi Arabia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 3, 2007
AHRC-OL-022-2007
An Open Letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking legal assistance for the young Sri Lankan woman facing the death sentence by beheading in Saudi Arabia
Dr. Palitha T.B. Kohona,
Secretary / Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic Building,
Colombo 01, Sri Lanka.
Dear Dr. Kohona,
Re Rizana Nasik of Mutur—the young girl facing death sentence by beheading:
Matter relating to legal assistance for her appeal.
I am sure you are aware of the death sentence pronounced on Rizana Nasik of Mutur by a Court in Saudi Arabia and who is now awaiting the death sentence. She still has time for filing an appeal which has to be done soon. We have been informed that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been in contact with Rizana Nasik’s family in Mutur. This family belongs to the lower income group and is totally unable to meet the cost of litigation which according to your embassy sources in Saudi Arabia amounts to about Rs. 600,000. We also understand that the father of Rizana Nasik has met Foreign Ministry officials in Colombo and has already explained to them that the family does not have means to contribute to this appeal.
We also understand that the Sri Lankan embassy in Saudi Arabia has already made representations to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs requesting funds to enable filing of this appeal. There also seems to be good grounds for appeal since the entire case had been conducted in a language not understood by her and also without any meaningful interpretation provided to her. She had also not been legally represented at the trial. She is also quite young and is said to have left for employment a few months ago when she was only about 17 years of age. Furthermore the totality of evidence against her is supposed to be a confession which she had later withdrawn. In a foreign country under such circumstances and being of such young age, it is quite possible that she may have made the confession under duress.
Nonetheless, such defenses are hardly of much use within the legal system of Saudi Arabia. A Sri Lankan citizen—particularly of that young age—facing a criminal trial carrying the possibility of the death sentence which within the particular jurisdiction is carried out rapidly Rizana Nasik would have deserved legal assistance from the embassy of her country from the very beginning. However, even at this late stage, the Government of Sri Lanka owes it to this young Sri Lankan citizen to rapidly intervene and assist her. According to interviews in the media, it appears that what prevents granting her legal redress is some rule, regulation or policy that seems to deny legal assistance by the Sri Lankan Government to Sri Lankans migrating to other countries who are accused of criminal charges. I am sure you would agree that there is no legal basis to withdraw the protection that the government of a particular country owes to its citizens in this manner. Particularly, migrant workers who leave their countries for employment should not be deprived of legal protection merely because they are accused of some crime. As you are aware, the Sri Lankan Constitution recognizes the presumption of innocence of a person until proven guilty.
It is hardly necessary to remind you of the fate of 4 other Sri Lankans who were beheaded recently—one of whom was in fact sentenced only for 15 years of rigorous imprisonment. Even when that matter was being publicly discussed, Sri Lankan embassy officials in Saudi Arabia made promises to provide legal assistance to enable these 4 persons to reviews their cases even at that last stage. The President of the country at the time, Chandrika Kumaratunga made a public statement, which was published on the front page of some newspapers, that she will directly intervene with His Royal Highness of Saudi Arabia to seek pardon on behalf of these 4 persons. The present President as Prime Minister then and later as President also made several public statements assuring that all attempts would be made to assist the 4 persons facing death sentence. However, when the death sentence was in fact carried out, no one—including embassy officials in Saudi Arabia—was aware of it.
We are writing this to bring to your kind notice the pitiful plight of this young woman and to urge you to take all appropriate actions to ensure that she will be provided with legal assistance to enable her to file this appeal. We also urge you to review any rule, regulation or policy that may exist obstructing the granting of protection owing to such a citizen.
We hope that you will graciously and expeditiously intervene in this matter.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Moon Jeong Ho
Programme Officer,
Urgent Appeals Desk.
Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong
Posted on 2007-07-03
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 3, 2007
AHRC-OL-022-2007
An Open Letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs seeking legal assistance for the young Sri Lankan woman facing the death sentence by beheading in Saudi Arabia
Dr. Palitha T.B. Kohona,
Secretary / Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic Building,
Colombo 01, Sri Lanka.
Dear Dr. Kohona,
Re Rizana Nasik of Mutur—the young girl facing death sentence by beheading:
Matter relating to legal assistance for her appeal.
I am sure you are aware of the death sentence pronounced on Rizana Nasik of Mutur by a Court in Saudi Arabia and who is now awaiting the death sentence. She still has time for filing an appeal which has to be done soon. We have been informed that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been in contact with Rizana Nasik’s family in Mutur. This family belongs to the lower income group and is totally unable to meet the cost of litigation which according to your embassy sources in Saudi Arabia amounts to about Rs. 600,000. We also understand that the father of Rizana Nasik has met Foreign Ministry officials in Colombo and has already explained to them that the family does not have means to contribute to this appeal.
We also understand that the Sri Lankan embassy in Saudi Arabia has already made representations to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs requesting funds to enable filing of this appeal. There also seems to be good grounds for appeal since the entire case had been conducted in a language not understood by her and also without any meaningful interpretation provided to her. She had also not been legally represented at the trial. She is also quite young and is said to have left for employment a few months ago when she was only about 17 years of age. Furthermore the totality of evidence against her is supposed to be a confession which she had later withdrawn. In a foreign country under such circumstances and being of such young age, it is quite possible that she may have made the confession under duress.
Nonetheless, such defenses are hardly of much use within the legal system of Saudi Arabia. A Sri Lankan citizen—particularly of that young age—facing a criminal trial carrying the possibility of the death sentence which within the particular jurisdiction is carried out rapidly Rizana Nasik would have deserved legal assistance from the embassy of her country from the very beginning. However, even at this late stage, the Government of Sri Lanka owes it to this young Sri Lankan citizen to rapidly intervene and assist her. According to interviews in the media, it appears that what prevents granting her legal redress is some rule, regulation or policy that seems to deny legal assistance by the Sri Lankan Government to Sri Lankans migrating to other countries who are accused of criminal charges. I am sure you would agree that there is no legal basis to withdraw the protection that the government of a particular country owes to its citizens in this manner. Particularly, migrant workers who leave their countries for employment should not be deprived of legal protection merely because they are accused of some crime. As you are aware, the Sri Lankan Constitution recognizes the presumption of innocence of a person until proven guilty.
It is hardly necessary to remind you of the fate of 4 other Sri Lankans who were beheaded recently—one of whom was in fact sentenced only for 15 years of rigorous imprisonment. Even when that matter was being publicly discussed, Sri Lankan embassy officials in Saudi Arabia made promises to provide legal assistance to enable these 4 persons to reviews their cases even at that last stage. The President of the country at the time, Chandrika Kumaratunga made a public statement, which was published on the front page of some newspapers, that she will directly intervene with His Royal Highness of Saudi Arabia to seek pardon on behalf of these 4 persons. The present President as Prime Minister then and later as President also made several public statements assuring that all attempts would be made to assist the 4 persons facing death sentence. However, when the death sentence was in fact carried out, no one—including embassy officials in Saudi Arabia—was aware of it.
We are writing this to bring to your kind notice the pitiful plight of this young woman and to urge you to take all appropriate actions to ensure that she will be provided with legal assistance to enable her to file this appeal. We also urge you to review any rule, regulation or policy that may exist obstructing the granting of protection owing to such a citizen.
We hope that you will graciously and expeditiously intervene in this matter.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Moon Jeong Ho
Programme Officer,
Urgent Appeals Desk.
Asian Human Rights Commission, Hong Kong
Posted on 2007-07-03
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
