<<previous  |  index  |  next>>

VII. Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Saudi Arabian law still permits the use of corporal punishment both as a judicial penalty and as an administrative penalty in detention facilities, although Saudi Arabia has begun to take steps toward addressing corporal punishment in home and school settings.¹⁵⁸ The law also permits authorities to use solitary confinement and denial of visits and correspondence to discipline detainees. In addition, Ministry of Social Affairs regulations and practices appear to endorse a routine practice of placing children in isolation. Examples of when children are placed in isolation include those new in detention, and girls and young women with treatable medical conditions.

The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has concluded that corporal punishment, which it defines as encompassing “any punishment in which physical force is used and intended to cause some degree of pain or discomfort, however light,” is “invariably degrading.”¹⁵⁹ As such it violates the prohibition on cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment in both the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention against Torture.¹⁶⁰

Additional guidance on measures constituting cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in custodial settings is provided by UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty. These state,

All disciplinary measures constituting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment shall be strictly prohibited, including corporal punishment, placement in a dark cell, closed or solitary confinement or any other punishment that may compromise the physical or mental health of the juvenile concerned. The reduction of diet and the restriction or denial of contact with family members should be prohibited for any purpose.¹⁶¹

Prolonged isolation may have serious negative effects on children’s mental, emotional, and physical well-being.

Use of Corporal Punishment and Solitary Confinement as Punishment

Corporal punishment imposed as a criminal sanction in Saudi Arabian law includes amputation and flogging. There is very widespread recourse to the latter—based on Human Rights Watch’s review of sentences, criminal sentences that do not include flogging appear to be rare.¹⁶² Human Rights Watch knows of no cases of persons subject to punitive amputation for crimes committed while children, but given the obscurity surrounding the administration of criminal justice in Saudi Arabia, such cases cannot be ruled out.

The 1978 Imprisonment and Detention Law also provides disciplinary sanctions that include solitary confinement and flogging for violations of internal regulations. Solitary confinement can be imposed for periods of up to 15 days, which officials can double in cases of recidivism, and an offender is liable to flogging of up to 10 lashes.¹⁶³ Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs Decree 1354 of 1975 (1395) on internal regulations for social observation homes and Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs Decree 2083 of 1976 (1396) on implementing regulations for girls’ and young women’s welfare homes both set forth detailed procedures for carrying out corporal punishment.¹⁶⁴

None of these laws and regulations specifies a minimum age for imposing corporal punishment, and press accounts periodically list cases of courts sentencing children to hundreds of lashes.¹⁶⁵ The director of the Riyadh Social Observation Home told Human Rights Watch that officials at his facility only flog boys ages 15 and older, and that they carry out the floggings in front of other detainees. He also noted that the facility has a staff member designated to “ensure that floggings take place in a timely manner, and every Tuesday [the staff member] prepares 15 or 16 files for flogging.”¹⁶⁶

A Ministry of Social Affairs supervisor acknowledged that staff at the Riyadh Girls’ and Young Women’s Welfare Institution use solitary confinement to punish disciplinary infractions such as hitting another inmate, but added that “we don’t put psychiatric cases in solitary.”¹⁶⁷

Denial of Family Visits as Punishment

Further disciplinary sanctions provided for in the 1978 Imprisonment and Detention Law include the denial of visits and correspondence.¹⁶⁸ The directors of both the Riyadh Social Observation Home and the Riyadh Girls’ and Young Women’s Welfare Institution declined to provide Human Rights Watch with details about rules and disciplinary practices at those facilities. However, the director of the social observation home did volunteer that he disciplines detainees who commit infractions by preventing them from receiving family visits or participating in activities, and noted that the judge can order additional punishments.¹⁶⁹

Isolation for Reasons Other Than Punishment

“Therapeutic” isolation that is not a medical necessity

Ministry of Social Affairs regulations for social observation homes and girls’ and young women’s welfare institutions provide that girls and young women may be placed in isolation if their “condition calls for it.”¹⁷⁰ While limited periods of isolation or specific precautionary measures are medically appropriate in certain circumstances,¹⁷¹ Ministry of Social Affairs staff subject detainees to isolation when it is not medically necessary.

According to a Ministry of Social Affairs supervisor, staff at the Riyadh Girls’ and Young Women’s Welfare Institution routinely test all new detainees for infectious diseases, including HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases.¹⁷² They then isolate indefinitely in a separate room those found to have “hepatitis B, herpes, or other sexual diseases.” Staff require that all detainees in such isolation use a separate toilet, separate eating utensils, and a separate washing machine. Isolated detainees must also sit at a distance from other students during compulsory classes.¹⁷³

Routine isolation of children and young women found to have sexually transmitted diseases is medically inappropriate and unnecessarily stigmatizing. Sexually transmitted diseases do not routinely require isolation because they are not spread through casual contact and respond well to medication. Even hepatitis B, which can be highly infectious among non-immune individuals,¹⁷⁴ can be contained through routine vaccination of susceptible individuals and through universal precautions¹⁷⁵ by detention center staff and individuals who are hepatitis B surface antigen positive, including covering of cuts and skin lesions, and preventing the sharing of items that could become contaminated with blood, such as toothbrushes or razors.

Additionally, mandatory medical testing for sexually transmitted diseases may violate children’s rights to privacy and to informed consent to medical procedures.¹⁷⁶ Violations of the right to privacy are particularly likely when children are subjected to stigmatizing isolation practices that target those with sexually transmitted diseases. With regard to HIV, the Committee on the Rights of the Child has stated,

States parties must refrain from imposing mandatory HIV/AIDS testing of children in all circumstances and ensure protection against it. While the evolving capacities of the child will determine whether consent is required from him or her directly or from his or her parent or guardian, in all cases, consistent with the child’s right to receive information under articles 13 and 17 of the Convention, States parties must ensure that, prior to any HIV testing, whether by health-care providers in relation to children who are accessing health services for another medical condition or otherwise, the risks and benefits of such testing are sufficiently conveyed so that an informed decision can be made. States parties must protect the confidentiality of HIV test results, consistent with the obligation to protect the right to privacy of children (art. 16), including within health and social welfare settings, and information on the HIV status of children may not be disclosed to third parties, including parents, without the child’s consent.¹⁷⁷

Human Rights Watch was unable to determine whether Saudi Arabian authorities test boys held in social observation homes for HIV and other sexually transmitted disease, and what treatment those who test positive might receive. However, our interviews with detainees and medical staff at an adult prison revealed serious violations of detainees’ rights to privacy, informed consent, and health, and raise questions about practices in other places of detention. Medical staff at the al-Ha’ir prison south of Riyadh told Human Rights Watch that they test all incoming detainees for HIV, hepatitis B, and other diseases. On the day of our visit, a list with the names, nationalities, and wing of 33 HIV-positive detainees was posted on a wall in the prison clinic, easily visible to clinic staff. According to the staff, authorities isolate detainees found to be HIV-positive from other detainees by placing them in a special section of the prison where they do not receive medical treatment for their illness. When Human Rights Watch researchers visited the isolation wing we saw visibly ill detainees held in unhygienic conditions in individual cells; some detainees had soiled themselves and appeared not to have bathed for several weeks.¹⁷⁸

Isolation during investigation

According to the Ministry of Social Affairs, all girls’ and young women’s welfare institutions contain “a solitary confinement section where girls and young women are placed during investigation.”¹⁷⁹ Staff at the Riyadh Girls’ and Young Women’s Welfare Institution did not show Human Rights Watch researchers this area during our December 2006 visit, and the Minister of Social Affairs did not permit us to interview detainees there or at the Riyadh Social Welfare Home about their experiences. However, anecdotal evidence suggests that this practice may also take place in boys’ detention centers. For example, authorities at the Dammam Social Observation Home reportedly kept Ahmad al-Dukkani, the Egyptian boy sentenced to death in 2005 for a murder committed when he was 13 (see above), in solitary confinement for months following his arrest. Al-Dukkani stated in a press interview that he spent the period “crying from fear and loneliness,” and was only released after “it became clear to all that I am a gentle person and life goes on.”¹⁸⁰