Saudi Crown Prince announces new draft laws to reform judicial institutions

[webfact]

Saudi Crown Prince announces new draft laws to reform judicial institutions

 

FILE PHOTO: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman announces a zero-carbon city called "The Line" to be built at NEOM in northwestern Saudi Arabia, January 10, 2021. Bandar Algaloud/Courtesy of Saudi Royal Court/Handout via REUTERS

 

LONDON (Reuters - Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said the government will discuss a set of new draft laws designed to enhance the efficiency and integrity of the kingdom's judicial system, state news agency (SPA) reported on Monday.

 

The new laws - the personal status law, the civil transactions law, the penal code of discretionary sanctions and the law of evidence - are currently being finalised and will then be submitted to the cabinet and relevant bodies as well as the advisory Shura Council, before they are finally approved.

 

"The new laws represent a new wave of reforms that will ... increase the reliability of procedures and oversight mechanisms as cornerstones in achieving the principles of justice, clarifying the lines of accountability," Prince Mohammed said in the statement.

 

The Prince, known in the West as MbS, has launched a series of social and economic reforms aimed at modernising the conservative kingdom, which has no codified system of law to go with the texts making up sharia, or Islamic law.

 

Having no written laws that govern certain incidents had for decades resulted in discrepancy in court rulings and prolonged litigation, hurting many Saudis, mostly women.

 

Riyadh has, for example, long endured international censure over the guardianship system that assigns each women a male relative - a father, brother, husband or son - whose approval was needed for various big decisions throughout a woman’s life. The law was reformed in August 2019.

 

"This was painful for many individuals and families, especially women, permitting some to evade their responsibilities.

 

This will not take place again once these laws are promulgated pursuant to legislative laws and procedures," MbS said.

 

The statement did not give details on the suggested reforms in these draft laws except that they will be announced successively in 2021.

 

(Reporting by Marwa Rashad; Editing by Paul Simao)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2021-02-09

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[sammieuk1]

First up no more hacking your opponents to death in a Turkish embassy ????

[Tug]

Deeds not words I personally don’t believe it they are about 400 years behind the times

[pacovl46]

How about introducing a law that makes sure you rot in prison for the killing you ordered?!

[Phuketshrew]

 

[ChipButty]

Their country their laws if you dont like it dont go, same as in Thailand

[jak2002003]

5 minutes ago, ChipButty said:

Their country their laws if you dont like it dont go, same as in Thailand

You don't care at all for human rights or when people are being abused and tortured. Please yourself them. 

[ChipButty]

5 minutes ago, jak2002003 said:

You don't care at all for human rights or when people are being abused and tortured. Please yourself them. 

I usually do 

[JWRC]

2 hours ago, Tug said:

Deeds not words I personally don’t believe it they are about 400 years behind the times

They are not 400 years behind anything, and what times are you talking about? Saudi has a far different culture to what most Westener's are used to. The crown prince is a progressive man, who is bringing about changes. It is interesting that even though many changes are official in some situations the Saudi's carry on as before. This is their choice, many would not enjoy  being up with the times as you put it, they would find some parts of our culture offensive and lacking in respect as one example.

[ChipButty]

The Saudis had it right not letting women drive 

[tifino]

the masters of double speak

[norfolkandchance]

I went to Saudi for the culture, not to make lots of money.

[Pique Dard]

 

7 hours ago, webfact said:

a set of new draft laws

hope the new laws will  ensure that men wear veil and that they will never go out without being accompagnied by a woman, be it the mother or the sister

[jak2002003]

5 hours ago, ChipButty said:

I usually do 

Thanks for making the world a better place....not. 

[bermondburi]

It's easy for an outsider to knock Saudi, but as someone who's spent nearly a decade in the country I'm very positive about the people, the country, and the direction things are moving in. 

 

The past couple of years I've seen change I never thought possible, even in the very conservative provincial city I live in. Things are changing so quickly here, and with such a young population this is only set to continue. 

 

It's easy to look at the bad things and the stereotypes, but personally I've found the people very friendly, warm, and welcoming. Far more than Thailand in many ways, and on a deeper level. I actually have Saudi male friends here, and they are great hosts. 

 

It's easy to comment on a place and people you know nothing about. 

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, JWRC said:

They are not 400 years behind anything, and what times are you talking about? Saudi has a far different culture to what most Westener's are used to. The crown prince is a progressive man, who is bringing about changes. It is interesting that even though many changes are official in some situations the Saudi's carry on as before. This is their choice, many would not enjoy  being up with the times as you put it, they would find some parts of our culture offensive and lacking in respect as one example.

I guess if progressive means waging a brutal war against one neighbor which has resulted in what is currently the worst humanitarian crisis, engaging in economic warfare with another (and nearly going to war against them), and scaring off investors with with strongarm tactics.

He has always been a thug, at heart. Here's a link to an article in the New Yorker about his early career. It's a chronicle of repeated failures and thuggery.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/09/a-saudi-princes-quest-to-remake-the-middle-east

 

[pacovl46]

8 hours ago, JWRC said:

They are not 400 years behind anything, and what times are you talking about? Saudi has a far different culture to what most Westener's are used to. The crown prince is a progressive man, who is bringing about changes. It is interesting that even though many changes are official in some situations the Saudi's carry on as before. This is their choice, many would not enjoy  being up with the times as you put it, they would find some parts of our culture offensive and lacking in respect as one example.

They might not live in the Stone Age when it comes to modern city architecture, but they most definitely still live in the Stone Age when it comes to human rights, women’s rights, LGBT rights, extrajudicial killings in foreign embassies and quite a few other things! 
 

While your beloved crown prince might be progressive, he’s also a murderer who stole the power from his relatives by accusing them of some ridiculous BS, so he could get his behind on the throne. He’s definitely evil and evil trumps any good you do! 

 

Edited February 9, 2021 by pacovl46

[Morch]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

I guess if progressive means waging a brutal war against one neighbor which has resulted in what is currently the worst humanitarian crisis, engaging in economic warfare with another (and nearly going to war against them), and scaring off investors with with strongarm tactics.

He has always been a thug, at heart. Here's a link to an article in the New Yorker about his early career. It's a chronicle of repeated failures and thuggery.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/09/a-saudi-princes-quest-to-remake-the-middle-east

 

 

6 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

They might not live in the Stone Age when it comes to modern city architecture, but they most definitely still live in the Stone Age when it comes to human rights, women’s rights, LGBT rights, extrajudicial killings in foreign embassies and quite a few other things! 
 

While your beloved crown prince might be progressive, he’s also a murderer who stole the power from his relatives by accusing them of some ridiculous BS, so he could get his behind on the throne. He’s definitely evil and evil trumps any good you do! 

 

 

Not to sing the guy's praises or anything, but had it been one of the other contenders, things domestic would not have changed an iota. On the foreign policy and relations arena, I think a case of if not that then the other, meaning the country would have been involved in some unsavory episode regardless, even if to a lesser extent.

 

I don't mind about how he makes his way to the throne, or that he shakes money off some rich fellow countrymen. That's largely irrelevant when it comes to introducing domestic changes or foreign policy actions.

 

With the latter, he seems to make some progress (saying this with caution), with the former he's got bad judgement or bad 'tools' (no pun intended) to carry them out. To a degree, I think that the general outlook of his drive (aimed against Iran), has some merit from his/SA point of view. It's more about crappy execution (again, no pun intended) of policy.

 

[Sujo]

4 hours ago, bermondburi said:

It's easy for an outsider to knock Saudi, but as someone who's spent nearly a decade in the country I'm very positive about the people, the country, and the direction things are moving in. 

 

The past couple of years I've seen change I never thought possible, even in the very conservative provincial city I live in. Things are changing so quickly here, and with such a young population this is only set to continue. 

 

It's easy to look at the bad things and the stereotypes, but personally I've found the people very friendly, warm, and welcoming. Far more than Thailand in many ways, and on a deeper level. I actually have Saudi male friends here, and they are great hosts. 

 

It's easy to comment on a place and people you know nothing about. 

Are u allowed to say different if living there?

Edited February 9, 2021 by Sujo

[ChipButty]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Are u allowed to say different?

Say what you want

[ChipButty]

Just because the Saudis have chopped a few heads off whats wrong with that? Britain and France where famous for it years ago

[bermondburi]

10 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Are u allowed to say different if living there?

Widespread public dissent is not tolerated that's true. Saudi is not alone in this respect. But you shouldn't conflate government policy with public opinion, although generally MBS is widely popular amongst the younger population for exactly the type of reforms that he has been making the past few years. He is generally less well liked by the older, more traditional population, and definitely less well liked by the religious clerics. 

 

What Saudis tell you privately and how they act in public may be two very different things. There's a good reason Saudis like high walls. 

[bermondburi]

13 minutes ago, ChipButty said:

Just because the Saudis have chopped a few heads off whats wrong with that? Britain and France where famous for it years ago

Last use of the guillotine in France was 1977. Not so long ago. 

[placeholder]

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

 

Not to sing the guy's praises or anything, but had it been one of the other contenders, things domestic would not have changed an iota. On the foreign policy and relations arena, I think a case of if not that then the other, meaning the country would have been involved in some unsavory episode regardless, even if to a lesser extent.

 

I don't mind about how he makes his way to the throne, or that he shakes money off some rich fellow countrymen. That's largely irrelevant when it comes to introducing domestic changes or foreign policy actions.

 

With the latter, he seems to make some progress (saying this with caution), with the former he's got bad judgement or bad 'tools' (no pun intended) to carry them out. To a degree, I think that the general outlook of his drive (aimed against Iran), has some merit from his/SA point of view. It's more about crappy execution (again, no pun intended) of policy.

 

Well, I'm sure his Iranian policy has merit from his and at least from some Saudis point of view. But it seems dubious that it has much merit from a more rational viewpoint. He waged economic war against Qatar for some trumped up reasons including a hostile chiron that was created by the UAE, his ally, hacking into the chiron generating server of Al Jazeera. In fact, he nearly waged a genuine war against the Qataris. And the Qataris did not back down. No way that can be spun as anything but a failure for MBS. 

 

 He is waging an ignominious and failing war against the Houthis in Yemen.

 

His economic policies are clearly deranged. His attempt to get investors to buy stock in Aramco pretty much collapsed. Getting investors to invest in pretty much anything in Saudi Arabia was doomed once he decided to shake down his own wealthy subjects for cash. Investors have to believe that rule of law will prevail in SA. Given that MbS clearly doesn't, (or, perhaps believes that he is the law) why should they?

 

To be fair, as you noted, he has made enormous progress against the mullahs. But ultimately his grandiose economic efforts are overwhelmingly likely to continue fail. 

Edited February 9, 2021 by placeholder

[pacovl46]

13 hours ago, Morch said:

 

 

Not to sing the guy's praises or anything, but had it been one of the other contenders, things domestic would not have changed an iota. On the foreign policy and relations arena, I think a case of if not that then the other, meaning the country would have been involved in some unsavory episode regardless, even if to a lesser extent.

 

I don't mind about how he makes his way to the throne, or that he shakes money off some rich fellow countrymen. That's largely irrelevant when it comes to introducing domestic changes or foreign policy actions.

 

With the latter, he seems to make some progress (saying this with caution), with the former he's got bad judgement or bad 'tools' (no pun intended) to carry them out. To a degree, I think that the general outlook of his drive (aimed against Iran), has some merit from his/SA point of view. It's more about crappy execution (again, no pun intended) of policy.

 

Pablo Escobar build schools and hospitals, but he was still a massive coke dealer who ruined the lives of countless people and had I don’t know how many people killed, which makes him a bad guy in my book.

 

The same goes for the Saudi crown prince. I don’t care how much progress he tries to implement, he’s still a murderer who deserves to go to prison for the rest of his life! 

[Morch]

14 hours ago, placeholder said:

Well, I'm sure his Iranian policy has merit from his and at least from some Saudis point of view. But it seems dubious that it has much merit from a more rational viewpoint. He waged economic war against Qatar for some trumped up reasons including a hostile chiron that was created by the UAE, his ally, hacking into the chiron generating server of Al Jazeera. In fact, he nearly waged a genuine war against the Qataris. And the Qataris did not back down. No way that can be spun as anything but a failure for MBS. 

 

 He is waging an ignominious and failing war against the Houthis in Yemen.

 

His economic policies are clearly deranged. His attempt to get investors to buy stock in Aramco pretty much collapsed. Getting investors to invest in pretty much anything in Saudi Arabia was doomed once he decided to shake down his own wealthy subjects for cash. Investors have to believe that rule of law will prevail in SA. Given that MbS clearly doesn't, (or, perhaps believes that he is the law) why should they?

 

To be fair, as you noted, he has made enormous progress against the mullahs. But ultimately his grandiose economic efforts are overwhelmingly likely to continue fail. 

 

We've been over this several times on past topics.

 

What's considered 'rational' for an outsider observer is not always relevant for the decisions made by parties involved. I doubt that Saudi Arabia would have been in a better position vs. Iran had MbS been sidelined or of a different character. Surely, things could have been thought out better, better executed (no pun intended) or different routs taken. But the continuation of the previous policy, namely doing nothing much but grumble, was, IMO, bound to place Saudi Arabia in a position where it couldn't even consider doing something anyway.

 

The Qatar thing, in all probability, would have gone off anyway sooner or later. This was just another round in a long standing conflict. Granted, it was made more toxic than necessary, and ultimately failed to secure any meaningful results.

 

The war in Yemen, while another failure, is again something which, IMO, would have happened anyway too. Not to the same extent, perhaps, but still. Country is too much of a strategic value and 'back yard' to be left alone or fall under hostile control. It could have been better managed, both on the intrigue and military fronts.

 

I think the foreign investment issues were not solely effected by the shakedown of rich Saudis. Especially with regard to investors already operating in-country or familiar with Saudi Arabia. There were several other factors involved - which you can attribute to issues above, for example (or chopping off people in embassies). As far as I'm aware, other ventures are either unaffected or not greatly so. When he starts nationalizing or shaking down foreign companies operating in Saudi Arabia, the "concerns" cited would be more relevant.

 

Again, many mistakes, and obviously not a nice person. Clearly issues of judgement, as well.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

Pablo Escobar build schools and hospitals, but he was still a massive coke dealer who ruined the lives of countless people and had I don’t know how many people killed, which makes him a bad guy in my book.

 

The same goes for the Saudi crown prince. I don’t care how much progress he tries to implement, he’s still a murderer who deserves to go to prison for the rest of his life! 

 

Nobody was arguing he's a nice guy, even.

 

[pacovl46]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Nobody was arguing he's a nice guy, even.

 

Yeah, but comments how progressive he is and that he’s much better in that regard than others before him. While that might be the case it’s completely irrelevant because his evil actions trump everything good he ever did or will do in my book.

Edited February 10, 2021 by pacovl46

[bermondburi]

1 hour ago, pacovl46 said:

Yeah, but comments how progressive he is and that he’s much better in that regard than others before him. While that might be the case it’s completely irrelevant because his evil actions trump everything good he ever did or will do in my book.

Not everybody reads the same book, but thanks for your input. 

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

We've been over this several times on past topics.

 

What's considered 'rational' for an outsider observer is not always relevant for the decisions made by parties involved. I doubt that Saudi Arabia would have been in a better position vs. Iran had MbS been sidelined or of a different character. Surely, things could have been thought out better, better executed (no pun intended) or different routs taken. But the continuation of the previous policy, namely doing nothing much but grumble, was, IMO, bound to place Saudi Arabia in a position where it couldn't even consider doing something anyway.

 

The Qatar thing, in all probability, would have gone off anyway sooner or later. This was just another round in a long standing conflict. Granted, it was made more toxic than necessary, and ultimately failed to secure any meaningful results.

 

The war in Yemen, while another failure, is again something which, IMO, would have happened anyway too. Not to the same extent, perhaps, but still. Country is too much of a strategic value and 'back yard' to be left alone or fall under hostile control. It could have been better managed, both on the intrigue and military fronts.

 

I think the foreign investment issues were not solely effected by the shakedown of rich Saudis. Especially with regard to investors already operating in-country or familiar with Saudi Arabia. There were several other factors involved - which you can attribute to issues above, for example (or chopping off people in embassies). As far as I'm aware, other ventures are either unaffected or not greatly so. When he starts nationalizing or shaking down foreign companies operating in Saudi Arabia, the "concerns" cited would be more relevant.

 

Again, many mistakes, and obviously not a nice person. Clearly issues of judgement, as well.

There were a lot more rational people as possible successors. Mohammed bin Nayef comes to mind.

"Prince Ahmed and MBN spent time as minister of the interior, a powerful position with oversight of troops and Saudi Arabia’s large intelligence service. MBN had close ties to U.S. intelligence and was respected for his knowledge of security and terror threats in the Middle East. But over the past few years, their standing in the royal family has diminished as King Salman consolidated power and installed his son Mohammed bin Salman —known as MBS—as crown prince and the kingdom’s day-to-day ruler."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/top-saudi-royal-family-members-detained-11583531033

As for what would have happened under a different ruler, who knows? I doubt that something as minor as Qatar's tweaking of the Saudis would have upset a more rational ruler all that much. Can't imagine MbN being so impulsive and irrational. It is not cheap or frivolous name calling to to call MbS a megalomaniac.

And ventures in Saudi Arabia were greatly affected by MbS well before the Khashoggi assassinaton.

 

How Mohammed bin Salman Turned Saudi Arabia Into an Investment Wasteland

Long before the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, even as credulous Western boosters were promoting Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as a reformer and a visionary, the smart money was moving out of Saudi Arabia...

From 2016 to 2017, foreign direct investment in Saudi Arabia plummeted by an astonishing 80 percent, from about $7.5 billion to about $1.4 billion, according to the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development. Net capital outflows were also way up—largely because wealthy Saudis were moving money abroad, noted Phillip Cornell, an expert in the Saudi economy at the Atlantic Council.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/26/how-mohammed-bin-salman-turned-saudi-arabia-into-an-investment-wasteland-khashoggi/