Factors Affecting the Efficiency of Legal Mechanisms in Saudi Arabia
Salim Hamid N Almjnoni, Mohamad Rizal Bin Abd Rahman Faculty of Law, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia
Abstract: The Saudi Arabian criminal justice system is mysterious to the Western legal students due to its integration with the Islam religion and Middle Eastern culture. The lack of a formal penal code also adds to its mystery as it is difficult to understand how judicial discretion is guided, standardized, and implemented. There is a blurred line that separates religion from the state, and from an outsider's perspective, yet there is no difference between these two elements.
To the civilians in Saudi Arabia, integrating faith with the law has made it easy to understand the provisions of the law and those of religion. Legal practitioners in Saudi Arabia opine that this amalgamation has many efficiencies that make it advantageous over any other legal system.
They also note a few issues that the Kingdom's judicial body needs to address to streamline its operation, especially in consideration of human rights of the accused, access to legal counsel, and expedite the trial. A qualitative analysis of the response of fifteen legal practitioners in Saudi Arabia revealed that the Saudi legal system is efficient in addressing its legal challenges. Still, like any other system, it has systemic imperfections that can be addressed through policy action and codifying the penal code. The implication of the study shows that despite the inefficiencies in legal mechanism of the Saudi Arabia governing fair trials, there still exist certain aspects where the system excels.
Keywords: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Codification, Penal Code, Religious Law.
1 Introduction
The Saudi legal structure and the Western law principles are divergent in their structure but similar in their objectives. Although, there are problems being identified by the westerner‟ laws in regards with their Saudi counterparts‟ law due to their ignorant of global diverse legal perception that only develop over time to adjust itself with the historical, cultural and local happenings. Thus, the present study believes that the KSA legal system is functional and effective but should be improved to achieve greater legal flexibility and facilitate justice delivery in a free and fair manner. Evidently, there is no denying the fact that cultural norms developed for societies in the Middle East are greatly diverse as against what is tenable across the west.
However, Sharia laws that govern criminal justice conduct in the Kingdom of Suadi Arabia (KSA) are not remarkably opposite from any other common law. One could say that, both laws have evolved organically over time via several cases handled within their magistrates. In addition, in both circumstances, the judges make decisions based on their laws, which they believe and regard as ultimate.
Despite the inefficiencies pointed out by critics of Sharia laws, Sharia continues to play an important role in the administration of fair trials. The Saudi Arabian people's support of Islamic
law reflects the criminal justice system's that desire to embrace impartiality as well as fairness in trials. There are many critics who have contend that abuses of right on the part of defendant to a fair trial are so pervasive and difficult to bridge the KSA current criminal justice system along core international human rights norms. The presumption is that the KSA criminal justice system's violations of human rights come from flaws in the country's law and legal practises.
These detractors, on the other hand, exclusively directed due to understanding of KSA lack of a penal code and exploit this flaw.
Many judges, for example, make their decisions on their own, which is inconsistent and, in some cases, biassed and unfair. Article 48 directs the actions of these judges. Article 48 mandates that courts apply Sharia law without respect for earlier court judgements. The detractors also ignore the reality that the Saudi people are familiar with and accept these regulations.
As a result, Saudi courts and the present evidence are not bound by precedents due to the fact that the law of sharia offer the consistency needed to condemn the one who is guilty. Meaning that, the death sentence, sometimes known as capital punishment, is imposed following a fair trial that does not violate international law. Furthermore, KSA is not unusual, given that Western countries, including the United States, continue to use the death sentence and place faith in the legal system. It is essential to investigate the levels of satisfaction that legal practitioners in Saudi Arabia have in their practise by highlighting their perceptions of the Saudi court system's strengths and inefficiencies. Technological concerns, the subject of court independence, and the role of the media in educating the public about justice are examples of technical obstacles related to the creation of modern legal systems. The findings of a survey done to evaluate the elements that affect the efficiency of legal systems in Saudi Arabia are presented in this paper. In order to gain insight into any case study, you must have access to information. When the Saudi government has complete control over the information available to the public, however, there is a gap in determining whether the information is a true picture of the situation or propaganda designed to promote the government's operations.
In general, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's legal and human rights information is protected using a variety of measures, including media gags (control of publications in both virtual and hardcopy media) and heavy penalties for lawbreakers. The external view of Saudi Arabia is that its leadership is dictatorial, and that its judicial system is opaque and difficult to grasp. The lack of a code to define legal practices, a lack of awareness of how the Saudi justice system function, and a lack of public access to case ruling records are the key issues that affect public perceptions of Saudi criminal justice and the justice system. As a result, the current research will seek to identify the characteristics that influence the effectiveness of KSA's legal procedures. It will also demonstrate the benefits and drawbacks of legal mechanisms, as well as the degree to which they are influenced by other circumstances.
2 Literature Review
Law pervades every aspect of society because it assigns rights and imposes obligations on both individuals and governments. In this aspect, the perspective of John Austin believed that sovereignty is the ability to command and upholds a nation coercive ability to direct human affairs. Nowadays, countries gain their power of force, via set limits in order to protect citizens' rights. As a result, the command theory by Austin stressed that sovereignty entails a foundation of law, that could be important in absolute monarchy, such as Saudi Arabia, where Ulamma‟s along the King enach the law. Murphy (2005), on the other hand, says that the theory of natural law prescribed by Thomas Acquinas' is based on law being an element of God's discernible plan for human to succeed in life only if he can understand it by theoretical or practical reasoning.
Humans have a natural ability to comprehend the truth, whether in science or metaphysics. As a result, natural law requires individuals to observe specific moral obligations, whereas positive law is based on orders that are subject to constraints.
However, many researchers have analysed the evolution of the KSA's legal apparatus over time.
There are a number of noteworthy elements that have been employed to demonstrate the judicial system's inefficiency in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. In the past, such issues have hampered fair trials in criminal cases in numerous KSA courts. Thus, in the next section of this study, the literatures on current minimum standard for global prosecution that balances the rights and obligations of the victims, state, as well as the accused will be revealed as follows:
2.1 The General Framework of the Saudi Arabian.
2.1.1 The Theo-Monarchy Presence in Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia's governmental structure is so entwined with religion whereby it can be described only inform of theocratic state. As a result, Al-Tawneh (2009) claims that the KSA is a theo- monarchy founded on the state power (wlai al-amr) and principles of divine sovereignty (hakimiya). Afterward, both unite to form a system of governance in which supremacy of God is applied via the dominating Ulamma to maintain social order, while the family of Saud exercises political power. To implement this system into action, the King interacts with the religious council, which has theocratic oversight over political matters. Nevertheless, Political compromises between the two ruling institutions, in contrast to common belief, generate a unique framework.
2.1.2 Early History of Traditional Islamic Law
Traditional Arabian practises and Islam, notably after 12 A.D., collide in a comprehensive overview of Saudi criminal justice's history and development. The origins of Shariah law can be traced back to the birthplace and deathplace of Prophet Mohammed (Medina and Mecca), Peace be upon him. Before the 12th century, Arabian society had a social structure and corresponding norms.
Polygamy and Blood money were among the laws that were sanctioned at the time, until the prominence of Islam. Fast-forward of this historical revolution, some old habits that stood against the Islamic moral code, such as alcohol, adultery, and infanticide, were outlawed after this spiritual revolution. Conversely, polygamy and diyya, on the other hand, were legalised, resulting in a legal system of the puritan that has been reactive to foreign systems ever since.
2.1.3 Hybrid Criminal Justice System from Colonial Period and beyond
According to Lippman (1989), the Ottoman Empire under the British colonisation said that the modern-day of Saudi Arabia is embedded and established legal systems of the Western in conjunction with Koranic law. The Sharia law on the other hand, remained the major source of law in theory, but it was limited to personal issues like "marriage, divorce, inheritance, and religious endowment." By way of treaties of the colonies which focus to encourage trade between Europe and Arabia, the British' then innovative legal system and became a dominant feature of Saudi national law. Following the establishment of the KSA as a free monarchy, the Supreme Council as well as the King Shariah took social and political responsibilities in order to uphold ethical values.
2.1.4 The Saudi Arabia Contemporary Sources of Shariah Law
The synthesis of moral and law principles established in the Hadith as well as Quran is seen as a return to authentic Islam. Nevertheless, the Basic Law of Governance article 48 essentially provides for the constitutional implementation of Shariah law in Saudi Arabia. According to Ghazi (2010), the King, together with the government, plays a legislative function in Saudi Arabia, in relation to the aforementioned article of the KSA constitution.
More so, the Judiciary is another institution involved in the execution of Shariah law, although it is based on the Sunnah and Quran. In essence, this emphasises the primacy of religious sources over the constitution and implementing legislation. As a result, the Basic Legislation of Governance along the religious texts, in their respective order of hierarchy, are the primary sources of law of the KSA.
2.1.5 Saudi Arabia Law with other Modern Sources.
The kingdom of Saudi Arabia can be said to be an absolute monarchy that follows the Islamic laws as pronounced in the Quran as well as Sunnah. According to van Eijk (2010), Shariah is the Kingdom's constitution as defined in the Basic Ordinance of 1992 article 1. Been the most upper authority in the land, it governs all elements of social, political, and commercial life. Simply put, Fatwas are the religious edicts that are issued from time to time, and also sources of legislation.
Furthermore, the nation‟s courts use Shariah law to resolve disputes, as well as the King's ordinances, to the degree that they do not contradict the Sunnah as well as the Quran. Saudi Arabia's court system is notable for having a structure from lower up to the upper courts, with administrative powers located in Riyadh and Mecca. Nevertheless, the death penalty can also be
appealed to the Supreme Judicial Council, which is an even higher court. Another feature of this type of legislation is uncodified nature of the criminal procedure, consisting of the Qesas, Hudud, and Tazir procedures already mentioned. Except for the reliance on religious law, including related ordinances as the source of law, this judicial framework features characteristics of Western political, legal, and judicial systems.
2.2. Saudi Arabia Criminal Justice in Relation to Rights Of The Accused
In comparison to secular criminal justice systems, the Saudi Arabia Law of Criminal Procedure provides certain minimal protections to the accused (2000). According to Walker (1993), Shariah is the cornerstone of criminal law because it contains God's will. When the clerk receives a complaint from a a member of the public or victim, then the clerk will notifies the defendant promptly and again, or an ex-parte ruling will be made for the accused's rights to take effect before the trial. Additionally, LCP 2001 guarantees the ability to bail out, particularly when the defendant is convicted or suspected of Tazir offences, but not Hudud offences.
Furthermore, he states that arbitrary searches are prohibited by Shariah law only if the individual involved is a perpetual criminal or is properly suspected of having committed a crime. In the time of the trial, Walker (1993) discovers that the accused will be tried in front of an impartial Kadhi in an open court. This refers to the procedural safeguards that apply in Saudi Arabia during the trial as well as pre-trial stages of the criminal process. Nonetheless, Walker (1993) discovered in terms of evidentiary safeguards that Hudud crimes necessitate a higher proof standard that indicates a reasonable justification. Another crucial safeguard for the accused is the insanity consideration as a complete defence to an accusation. Notably, the required legal system is a witness to testify alone, otherwise the testimony is considered hearsay. When an accused self-incriminates, he or she must confess several times because witnesses may be against him.
Cross-examination is another right afforded to the accused, but the Kadhi, not the accused, is the one who administers the questions. Other rights include the will to an interpreter in the case they don't speak Arabic, the right to appeal, and protection from false testimony in Hudud cases. As a result, despite the modest problems posed by a conservative approach to execution, this statute is comprehensive.
2.3 Criminal Procedure 2001 of Saudi Arabia Law: Compatibility With Human Righes The Saudi Law of Criminal Procedure (2001-LCP) governs the person who has committed a crime somewhat interactions with the courts from pre-trial through post-trial. In general, AL- Subaie (2013) claims that the passage of LCP 2001 changed the way criminal justice is administered, although there are still existential challenges. To begin with, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has failed to ratify several significant international conventions.However, there is a high tendency that articles (18 and 20) of the ICCPR, which grant broader pre-trial rights, will be in direct conflict with Shariah if the Kingdom ratifies it. Invariably, it will also mean that Islamic law promotes human rights, but with some exceptions.
Furthermore, there is no process in place to deal with redacted confessions in which the accused claims to have surrendered under duress or torture, negating the defendant's right to a fast trial.
The aforementioned issue emerges as a result of the court complaints system, which kicks in when a defendant files one, triggering new investigations. Furthermore, the lack of a review procedure for protracted detentions causes criminal proceedings to be prolonged. Compensation for an acquitted criminal who was wrongfully convicted on appeal is a key feature of this statute.
As the supreme law, the Quran contains unchangeable precepts that push for the right of human as well as political convenience.
2.4 Practical Aspects Of Criminal Defence In Saudi Arabia: An Empirical Perspective
According to Al-Amoudi (2014), the right of a defendant to counsel in Saudi courts is provided for in the LCP 2001 and is widely practised empirically. Lawyers continue to perform their art in a properly controlled atmosphere, he claims, in order to advise their clients, increase the judges' legal expertise, and scrutinise evidence. As a result, judges' early apprehensions about exercising this right have dissipated.
Unlike many of the previous theoretical studies discussed here, this empirical investigation shows that the concept of a skewed right to defence counsel complies with international norms.
His research shows that lawyers advise clients during the pre-trial stage, evaluate due process standards during the trial, then negotiate penalty at sentence and review at the appeal stage.
Furthermore, according to the findings of this eye-opening study, 80 percent of respondents thought that lawyers improved system efficiency. Perhaps this study disproves current and previous beliefs about the entitlement to legal representation following the criminal procedure of 2001 amendments.
2.5 Criminal Justice Process In Saudi Arabia and Modernity: Schools of Thought
Shepard (1987) claims that the sole difference between Islamic modernism, fundamentalism, and secularism is their respect for totalism of Islam. On the other hand, he considers Islamic traditionalism and neo-traditionalist schools to be high on the modernity scale. Totalism refers to religion as a full set of instructions for organising social, economic and political life in an Islamic state governed by Shariah. Furthermore, he defines Modernism as a preference for modern technology and social structures, including a positive attitude toward modern institutions and a progressive way of life. Indeed, understanding the ideological split within the faith begins with understanding modernity and Islamic totalitarianism.
2.5.1 Legal Traditionalists
Classical thinkers argue that religious commandments from God are unchangeable and should be followed exactly as they are because they are God's will. As a result, there was a claim that Islam is a divine revelation that is documented in both the Sunnah and Quran (Nasr, 1987).
Nevertheless, traditional Islam adheres to the revealed interpretation of the texts and is hence
relevant for those times and the future. “Tradition denotes the sacred, eternal, immutable Truth;
perennial wisdom, as well as the continual application of its unchanging principles to diverse situations of space and time,” he continues.
These traditionalists believe that the Quran should be interpreted in its original form and content, while also taking into account the Prophet Mohammed's traditional commentary. Traditionalists believe that social, political, and economic parts of Islam should be practised in their purest form to reverse the effects of colonialism. Therefore, Islam as a pure religion clash with modern notions and values, which are the result of Western dominance over humanity.
2.5.2 Puritans, Extremists, and Political Islamists.
Within Islam's totalist component, there are also theological puritans, fanatics, and political Islamists. Puritans, according to Saeed (2007), are persons who are focused on "right belief"
from a literal premise rather than Islamic law. They also maintain conservative attitudes on women and advocate for a return to Islamic principles. Extremists, on the other hand, think that through liberation movements and other aggressive measures, Muslims can be freed from the West and apostate governments. Values and principles, according to political Islamists, are the route and light that will lead to a transition away from the Western ideology.
2.5.3 Modernity and Islam
As stated by Khalil (2004), the post-World War II normative paradigm brought in a shift and dedication to human rights, but the Islamic World was slow to co-opt them in support of their traditional ethical traditions. Thus, Islam's modernity is viewed through the lens of the faith, particularly its ideals that support international human rights.
This is because the Quran contains countless verses that advocate tolerance, charity, and compassion while condemning oppression, bigotry, and injustice.” Modernists, on the other hand, do not believe in the separation of the state and religion, which is why changes can be carried out within the boundaries of Islam rather than by secular Western standards. As a result, modernists are far from conformists, yet they recognise the existence of human rights values inside Islam.
2.6 Theoretical Background
The legal structure of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is greatly influenced by the traditions and ideals of Saudi Arabian Eastern principles. The precepts of the Quran and other holy writs that characterise Islam are heavily influenced. As a result of these emotions, attempts at modernization have been regarded with scepticism. The United Nations was one of the pivotal times that may have transformed the KSA's approach to legal basics, but it failed.
The United Nations was founded in 1945, in which the KSA become one of the 51st nations that produced the original Charter. KSA actively assisted in determining some of the
present international community's human rights issues as a result of its involvement in the drafting process.
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, did not vote in 1948 for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which drew widespread condemnation. Their voluntary absence was based on their opposing viewpoints, which were expressed by numerous articles in the UDHR. Article 16 of the UDHR, for example, specifies that “men and women are entitled to equal rights in marriage, during marriage, and at the dissolution of marriage.” This item, according to the KSA, does not aligned along the patriarchal essence law of Islam that form the bedrock of the country's legal framework. The Saudi Arabian government opposed to these rules due to the fact that they are in the opposite reflection of the Middle Eastern values and were geared toward Western perceptions and civilization.
In response, there was a proposition of an article amendment by the KSA. The believed in the proposed version is that: "men and women should be entitled to the full rights as defined in the marriage laws of their countries." The KSA believed that "Western practises" should not be used as a model for all civilizations, a viewpoint that undermined the concept of diversity. This amendment was rejected by the United Nations because it did not address women's rights. This predicament exemplifies why the United Nations holds the legal structure of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in low regard. Marriage rights (the restriction of marriage based on faith or race), marriage age, the freedom to change one's religion, and other matters were also hotly debated 3 Methodology
An analytical qualitative approach was used in this study. A study in the form of Interview questions was developed specific to the research questions and informed by the literature review and preliminary theoretical understanding of the factors affecting the KSA legal system. The population was drawn from the legal community of KSA, a sample of fifteen legal practitioners.
All participants were lawyers working in different regions in the KSA, in different departments of legal representation. All of the firms as well as offices where these lawyers worked had earned a license to practice law from the Saudi Ministry of Justice. The necessity for a diverse view of various legal experts whose work is guided by the same legal reference drove this diversity 4 Data Analysis and Result
To ascertain the factors that influence the effectiveness of legal systems. The interpretation of the data collected as indicated in the preceding section was examined. As a consequence of the analysis, the following results illustrate the strengths and/or weaknesses of legislative measures, as well as the degree to which they are influenced by other factors:
To ascertain the factors that influence the effectiveness of legal systems. The interpretation of the data collected as indicated in the preceding section was examined. As a consequence of the
analysis, the following results illustrate the strengths and/or weaknesses of legislative measures, as well as the degree to which they are influenced by other factors:
4.1 Q1: Do you face obstacles in the law when you are pleading in any case?
When asked if they encountered barriers during practise, eight respondents said „Yes' or
„Sometimes,' confirming that they did. The others (eight) responded with a simple "No" or said that there were no barriers to their practise. They further revealed that the main impediment were as follows:
i. The vagueness in judicial independence's definition.
ii. A lack of cooperation among staff in the court systems.
iii. A small number of judges to handle a large number of cases.
iv. A breakdown in communication between the arresting officers and the legal defence teams. This entails obscuring arrest evidence and prohibiting lawyers from participating in probes.
v. The lack of a codified code to govern legal professionals' decisions.
vi. The lack of a structured penal code that would specify the scope of Shariah regulations, particularly in tazeer offences, was the fundamental challenge with codification.
vii. The courts' lack of specialisation in dealing with specific legal situations.
viii. Because some crimes are ambiguously defined, some courts may be able to handle instances involving commerce.
ix. The lawyer, on the other hand, believed that the court was unqualified to hear such matters.
x. Finally, the difficulties of communicating with defendants in jails and prisons during trials and afterward
All of the participants who said yes to the existence of hurdles said that Saudi Arabian laws needed to be codified, court communication networks needed to be improved, and legal practitioners needed to connect with their clients
4.2 Q2: Is there a role for law enforcement agencies in the presence of these obstacles, or are they just lay in the regulations?
The following are the findings of the investigation into the role of law enforcement officials in removing these roadblocks. Eleven participants affirmed that law enforcement officers must be
active in addressing the issues in consideration by replying with a resounding „Yes,' or
„Sometimes,' along with justifications. Two people said no, while two said they didn't know.
The majority of respondents said that the relationship between law enforcement agencies, police, and other detectives was important in the administration of justice. The officers in these agencies' interpretations of the law were crucial. The facilitation of communication between among the defence and accuse teams was also part of the function of law enforcement officers. When lawyers want to meet the accused people who have been arrested by the arresting authorities, one responder mentioned that it can be problematic.
Again the respondents stated that the vague security checks as well as lack of support for lawyers in executing their work hampered their ability to serve their clients, resulting in a lack of interest for some lawyers to take up the pleadings in these instances. This bond was critical, especially when the case's outcome could mean a death penalty or the life sentence. As a result, law enforcement officials were a strength in the court system since they had the capacity to determine if a case was just or not. They were a reliable source of authority with the power to obstruct the administration of justice if they chose to do so.
4.3 Q3: In your opinion as a lawyer. Can we say that implementing the Islamic Sharia system makes it difficult to obtain fair trials in the Saudi criminal justice system? Explain briefly?
The implementation of the Islamic Sharia system, according to all respondents, does not make it hard to secure fair trials in the Saudi criminal court system. “Islamic law is the bedrock of justice, and its origin is the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad,” one reply asserted authoritatively. Fair trials are harmed if their provisions are not followed." They considered Shariah laws, fatwas, and Qur'anic instruction to be beneficial in meeting human needs for justice. They defined Islam as possessing a reliable justice for all humans, a flexible and viable premise for justice in all locations and times, and that justice is part of Islamic law's is tolerance.
As a result, when the laws are fully implemented, justice is obtained. Since the birth of Islam, Sharia law has been the enactment of the legal system, and all respondents described it as fair in protecting human rights and valid. They all concurred that any injustice resulting from the application of the Shariah, and its doctrines is the mistake of the implementers, interpreters, and purveyors of justice, rather than the Sharia law itself. All of the participants expressed strong support for God's supreme law governing people, showing that they believed in the justice standards they had studied but accepted their limitations as humans in comprehending God's will. They went on to say that one of Islam's fundamentals is that the Quran and Sunnah forbid injustice.
4.4 Q4 How convinced are the accused, victims, as well as the public, of the Saudi criminal justice system?
In terms of victim satisfaction with the criminal justice system, interviewees had differing perspectives on the result of legal proceedings and how they impacted the accused. One interviewee indicated that the level of dissatisfaction of the guilty could not be described since, in many ways, victims of the legal systems consider themselves as innocent, seeking justice, and wishing for their rights, especially independence, to be respected. No inmate could be satisfied with the conclusion unless they were pardoned or punished lightly, according to the responder.
One participant further criticised human nature for its unwillingness to accept penalty, no matter how just. As a result, even if the KSA justice system's conviction was correct, it could not be reviewed by all those who were harmed by it. There was agreement that assessing the population's satisfaction rates is challenging because the beneficiary of a criminal procedure is the most contented individual. It was also recognised that a sure way to assess contentment was the ease with which victims of injustice could access the criminal justice system and the meriting of fair punishment, appropriate to the offence, and governed by Shariah principles. However, there was no official research into such problems at the time of this analysis. As a result, people's contentment with the legal system is still a subject of opinion and speculation.
4.5 Q5: How do you see the view of international organizations and human rights agencies towards the Saudi criminal justice system, is it just, right, or critical that lacks the right?
The interviewees believed that global and human rights organisations were unduly critical of Saudi Arabia's justice system. They claimed that these bodies and agencies lacked the power, accuracy, and insight necessary to pass such criticisms. They argued that these organisations and agencies needed to conduct a thorough examination of the Saudi criminal justice system as well as Islamic law in order to change their perceptions. "There are certain human rights organisations applauding the Saudi criminal justice system, but we notice that some organisations are confined to the system owing to their lack of knowledge of the principles of Islamic law and the texts established in the Qur'an and the Sunnah," one source said. Another respondent claimed that these groups' views were largely obscured by their political goals and hence lacked credibility.
Overall, these Saudi Arabian legal professionals supported the country legal system, emphasising its strengths and how it upholds justice within their legal framework. They claimed that international organisations were unfamiliar with the "Saudi approach."
As a result, their accounts were inflated, packed with political objectives, and lacking in reality, and they needed to be trained and educated about Sharia and Qur'an provisions about justice. The lack of objectivity in these perceptions was attributed to the fact that the critics were foreigners who knew little about Islam. As a result, their viewpoints were skewed toward negativity, unconstructive criticism, and downplaying a perfect legal situation.
4.6 Q6: Are there factors in your view that affect the efficiency of legal mechanisms?
The efficacy of legal procedures in the Saudi criminal justice system was the second point to consider. The majority of respondents agreed that the legal mechanism's efficiency was relatively adequate. Two (2) participants said they were satisfied with the existing status of the mechanisms, but the remainder said there were certain flaws that made the system flawed and that adjustments could be done for better outcomes. The Saudi Arabian legal system, according to the majority of participants, is progressing and developing novel solutions for the justice system. They singled out the Ministry of Justice, claiming that it provides excellent and high- quality services. The most notable of these services was recognised in the financial sector, where an electronic auction was established to purchase real estate products without price overruns.
Interest rates were also deemed to be rather satisfactory, allowing for an economic boost.
5 Conclusion
This study found that the KSA legal system is effective in some respects but ineffective in others; as a result, if the system is misconstrued, it may intrinsically obstruct the implementation of fair and unbiased justice. The findings of the study demonstrated that legal specialists in Saudi Arabia are familiar with the system. They view their legal paradigm to be sustainable and just without referring to or comparing it to other legal systems. The study concluded that the major flaws include the consideration of hudud offences, the lack of a consistent code of reference, and judicial independence, all of which have an impact on the creation of appropriate sanctions. Its main advantages are its simplicity and integration into Islam as a culture and faith, as well as its ability to discourage crime.
5.1 Recommendation for further study
The following suggestions and recommendations are relevant to address the inefficiencies in the justice system:
First, the judges should be obliged to work according to the regulation of the law. This obligation means strengthening the judicial system, enhancing transparency, demanding accountability in their use of discretionary and ensuring the judicial inspection is strong, granting the inspectors broad powers and the ability to hold the negligent officers, including judges, accountable.
Secondly, introducing technology in the courts to ease coordination and notify lawyers when the dates of sessions are changed during the absence of judges from the judicial sessions is a significant adjustment.
Thirdly, it is essential to modify judicial instructions to allow the lawyer to obtain information about the cases with the arresting authorities.
Fourthly, enacting a penal code to guide the discretion of judges and legal technicians as well as allowing the amendment of the law and putting in place clear and explicit texts in the system that limit the conflict of judicial decisions.
Lastly, it is proper to educate the prison and corrections personnel about the importance of a credible justice system and how the violation of justice affects not only the accused but also the population
References
[1] Al-Atawneh, M. (2009). Is Saudi Arabia a theocracy? Religion and governance in contemporary Saudi Arabia. Middle Eastern Studies, 45(5), 721-737.
[2] Al-Hamoudi, A. K. (2014). Criminal Defense in Saudi Arabia: An Empirical Study of the Practice of Criminal Defense in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation).
[3] Allawi, A. A. (2009). The crisis of Islamic civilization. Yale University Press
[4] Alwasil, A. M. (2010). Saudi Arabia's engagement in, and interaction with, the UN human rights system: an analytical review. The International Journal of Human Rights, 14(7), 1072-1091.
[5] Bassiouni, M. C. (1999). Crimes against humanity in international criminal law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
[6] Carroll, C. M. (2000). An assessment of the role and effectiveness of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the Rwandan national justice system in dealing with the mass atrocities of 1994. BU Int'l LJ, 18, 163.
[7] Khalil, M. I. (2004). Islam and the Challenges of Modernity. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 97-104.
[8] Murphy, J. B. (2008). The Philosophy of Positive Law. Yale University Press.
[9] Naṣr, Ḥ. (1987). Traditional Islam in the modern world. KPI.
[10] Okon, E. E. (2014). Hudud punishments in Islamic criminal law. European Scientific Journal, 10(14).
[11] Paulson, S. L. (1995). The Published Writings of HLA Hart: A Bibliography. Ratio Juris, 8(3), 397-406.
[12] Radelet, M. L., & Borg, M. J. (2000). The changing nature of death penalty debates.
Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 43-61.
[13] Saeed, A. (2007). Trends in contemporary Islam: A preliminary attempt at a classification. Muslim World-Hartford Then Oxford-, 97(3), 395.
[14] Sebar, H, & Ismail, S. M. (2021). The use of flogging as a punishment in Saudi Arabia from the perspective of international human rights law. Iium law journal, 29(1), 77-102.
[15] Shepard, W. E. (1987). Islam and ideology: Towards a typology. International journal of Middle East studies, 19(3), 307-336.
[16] Vogel, F. E. (2000). Islamic law and the legal system of Saudi: Studies of Saudi Arabia (Vol. 8). Brill.
[17] Vogel, F. E. (2000). Islamic law and the legal system of Saudi: Studies of Saudi Arabia (Vol. 8). Brill.
[18] Zahraa, M. (2000). Characteristic features of Islamic law: perceptions and misconceptions. Arab LQ, 15, 168.
