RIYADH, 1 March 2007 — An official in the Higher Institute for Justice at Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University has stirred controversy by telling journalists at a press conference that the media in Saudi Arabia should not comment on judges’ rulings.
“The media does not have the right to interfere in judges’ rulings or in the process of a trial,” said Dr. Zaid ibn Abdul Kareem Al-Zaid, dean of the Higher Institute for Justice.
Commenting on a judge’s ruling to divorce a Saudi woman forcibly from her husband, he said the media should stop publishing stories when a case is in the courts because it puts psychological pressure on the judge.
“Justice is the only thing that the judge should have to deal with,” he said, adding that media interference and pressure could have a negative impact on the judge’s final decision.
Al-Zaid went further and said that judges had absolute authority and that no one had the right to interfere with their rulings. At the same time, he pointed out that because judges’ rulings are absolute, that meant a very great responsibility was on their shoulders.
“Because a judge’s ruling is accepted by the governorate, the police and other authorities and is not questioned, that means his responsibility is a very great one and he should review his ruling more than once,” Al-Zaid said.
Asked about judges who took advantage of the powers they had, the official said that at the end of the day, judges are “human and make mistakes like anybody else.”
He went on to say that mistakes made by judges did not stem from their abuse of power but rather from personal differences due to individual interpretations of each case. He noted that the educational backgrounds of judges in the Kingdom varied a great deal.
“Some of them have advanced degrees and others have experience gained from their practice,” he said. He then continued to defend judges by saying, “They have learned their job due to extensive experience and for that reason, they have been given absolute authority.”
Al-Zaid stressed that the Higher Institute for Justice was the only body in the Arab world which graduates people with masters and doctorate degrees in all subjects related to the justice system such as court reporters and investigators as well as judges.
Journalists in the Kingdom responded with amazement and astonishment to Al-Zaid’s comments.
Columnist Qenan Al-Ghamdi, a former editor in chief of Al-Watan newspaper, said that the press had every right to speculate on the outcome of a judge’s ruling.
“The only thing the press should not report is matters related to national security,” he told Arab News. “We in the media do not interfere with judge’s rulings; rather, we discuss the outcome of a ruling after it is made and question the logic behind the ruling, especially in cases as strange as Rania’s since a judge ordered that she be forcibly divorced from her husband.”
He said that the media in Saudi Arabia had never published any article or story asking a certain judge to take sides or to favor a certain ruling. “All we discuss after a ruling is on what basis the ruling was made. We want to know the reasoning and justifications,” he explained.
Turki Saleh, another Saudi journalist, said: “I am for the media discussing court cases but within limitations and in a context that will not affect the final ruling.” He noted that hearings for some cases had been postponed because of media comments while the trial was in progress. “In one particular case, a judge threatened to stop a trial until the media had stopped writing about the case,” he added.
Turki Al-Sudairi, president of the Saudi Journalists Association, was unavailable for comment.
