Letter: Saudis reform trial procedure

Stephen Jakobi
Thursday 22 May 1997 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Saudis reform trial procedure

Sir: The concentration on the shackling of the defendants and speculation on possible penalties in media reports on the opening of the trial of the nurses in Saudi Arabia appears to have allowed a remarkable shift in trial procedures to pass unnoticed.

Readers of The Independent (Letters, 2 January 1997) will recall our concern with the conduct of any trial according to Saudi custom. Our first anxiety was that the right of the defendants to have a lawyer to speak for them with powers to probe evidence and produce it on their behalf was on all past form unlikely to be granted. We were pleased to note that preliminary reports attributed to defence lawyers indicate that in a radical shift from precedent the Saudi authorities are conducting this trial on a Western adversarial model, with not only the defence and prosecution being represented properly but the victim's family being legally represented as well.

Unfortunately the trial is not being conducted in public, or at least with international observers present. It is hard to understand why a public trial was not provided for, thus completing perhaps the most remarkable transformation of trial procedures we have ever witnessed.

STEPHEN JAKOBI

Director, The Fair Trials Abroad Trust

Richmond, Surrey

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in