RIYADH, 4 July 2006 — The Shoura Council rejected a proposal yesterday that would have required the Commission for Promoting Virtue and Preventing Vice, also known as the religious police, to wear some kind of uniform.
The members of the consultative body turned the proposal down 63-52 following debate. The head of the Shoura said the decision on the matter was nonreversible.
Supporters of the proposal said that a uniform would help prevent impersonators to act as morality officers while other members argued that the current system, where officials of the commission are supposed to wear badges, is sufficient.
The proposal to study and discuss the issue was presented by Shoura member Talal Bakri.
“Because our country is going through times where evildoers are impersonating the identities of many officers of the law, I suggest that commission members wear a unified outfit in addition to their identity cards. This will deter others from impersonating them and make their jobs easier,” he told the council yesterday.
Shoura member Abdul Rahman Al-Zamil expressed his satisfaction of the commission’s role in public and said that such an idea was to dilute their efforts.
“A person who reads their report realizes the importance the commission has in our lives. They rid society of drug smugglers. In addition, our women and children feel safe when they go to a supermarket or mall,” he said. “I am totally against this proposal. And I believe they should continue to do their jobs as they are.”
Abdul Aziz Al-Rabeeah also rejected the proposal saying that there should be “no distinction between commission members and other pious people in the community”.
He cited the fact that “promoting virtue and preventing vice” was a job for every Muslim, saying that remaining low profile was part of their job in catching wrongdoers in public.
“The police sometimes resort to undercover agents that catch criminals while wearing plain clothes. As for impersonating their role, officers of the law wearing uniforms are also impersonated,” he said.
Khalil Al-Khalil disagreed with his colleague saying that a unified outfit would give commission members a sense of responsibility toward the public, as is the case with other officers of the law who wear uniforms, such as policemen.
“Part of the commission’s job has to do with enforcing security,” he said.
He mentioned the tension between commission members and the public due to the many stories narrated by people, “of which some are true and others are not.”
“These uniforms would leave no room for doubt when they approach people in public as a government agency. It will also put an end to impersonators of whom we have so many in our country,” he said.
Another Shoura member, Abdul Rahman Al-Attawi, opposed the measure, saying that there was no need for such uniforms when the current law requires all of the commission’s field officers to display their identity cards on their left shoulders.
“I think the fact that they are also accompanied by police officers when they go out, in addition to their sign being clear on their vehicles is good enough. After all, people can still impersonate them with uniforms as is the case with other officers of the law.”
Yousef Al-Maiman welcomed the idea saying that in the past people who used to work at the Grand Mosque in Makkah and the Prophet’s Mosque in Madinah wore jackets that distinguished them from other persons.
“Due to the fact that impersonators of the commission are on the rise, I suggest that they wear green jackets over their thobes that will distinguish them on duty,” he said.
Meanwhile, Shoura Council President Sheikh Saleh Bin Humaid rejected a request from the Islamic Affairs Committee to vote again on the three proposals rejected by the Shoura last week.
The council voted against increasing the salaries of the commission’s field workers, opening 20 new branches and increasing their annual budget by SR5 million.
Bin Humaid said that there were no convincing reasons to call for another vote “even though the law does give permission to the Shoura to revote on matters already voted on.”
He, however, said that the public should not misinterpret the voting. “This does not mean that the council is with or against a specific government body,” he added.
