Jun 4, 2014

After the adoption of the new Saudi law criminalizing terrorism and its financing, rights activist Waleed Abulkhair wrote on his Twitter account: “I wonder who will be classified as the No. 1 terrorist? Who will have the honor to be sentenced under this law?” But Abulkhair did not anticipate that that person would be him.

According to a statement issued by the Monitor of Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, which is headed by Abulkhair, the seventh session of his trial was held in Jeddah on May 25. This came after the presiding judge decided that the rights activist would be tried under the anti-terror law issued on Dec. 16, 2013, because his pro-rights actions and criticism of authorities constituted an act of terror.

It should be noted that the law against terrorism and its financing expanded the definition of a terrorist crime to include any act that harmed the reputation or standing of the state, or attempted to coerce authorities into doing or refraining from doing something. In other words, under this generalized description, any act of protest or criticism could be construed as being terrorist.

Upon the law’s announcement, Amnesty International issued a statement saying that this law will entrench existing patterns of human rights violations and serve as a further tool to suppress peaceful political dissent. Meanwhile, the Saudi Council of Ministers described the law on Dec. 16, 2013, as one built on achieving a balance between the need to face dangers and the respect of human rights.

The list of charges against Abulkhair, as published by the Saudi Monitor of Human Rights, included seeking to undermine the state, disobeying the king, insulting state officials and inflaming public opinion against them, disparaging the judiciary and accusing it of lacking integrity, inciting international organizations against the kingdom and establishing the Monitor of Human Rights, which transgresses on the jurisdiction of the Human Rights Commission and the National Society for Human Rights; in a summary list of the charges that the judge decided satisfied the description of terrorist acts, as defined by the law against terrorism and its financing.