Saudi Arabia’s Mecca Mosque Executions Put Ta’zir Law And Death Penalty Under Scrutiny

Saudi Arabia executed two Bangladeshi nationals on October 14 after convicting them of what authorities described as an “immoral act” inside a mosque in Mecca. But a prisoner list shared with Bangladesh’s consulate weeks before the executions did not disclose that either had received a death sentence, raising questions about the judicial proceedings, consular notification and the legal basis for the punishment.

The Saudi Interior Ministry said the sentences were imposed under ta’zir, a category of punishment under Islamic law that gives judges discretion in determining offences and penalties. The ministry cited the sanctity of the place and time but did not specify the alleged conduct, identify the mosque or publish the full court judgments.

According to The Daily Star, a confidential memo from the Bangladesh Consulate General in Jeddah shows that the two had been detained since August 2023 over separate allegations. Bangladesh has asked Saudi Arabia for the judgments and an explanation for the lack of prior notification.

What did Saudi Arabia say the two had done?

Saudi authorities identified the two as Nazerul Islam Abdul Basir and Siti Akhtar. A confidential consular memo obtained by The Daily Star spells the man’s name Nazrul Islam Abdul Basir and the woman’s name Suety Akhter, while her family identifies her as Sweety Akhtar. The spellings vary across reports.

Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministry has not independently verified the identities of the two executed individuals, according to The Indian Express. Siti Akhtar’s family is still awaiting official confirmation.

The court found the charges proven and sentenced them to death, with the ministry citing “the gravity and seriousness of their actions in violating the sanctity of both time and place”, according to the Associated Press.

A confidential consular memo obtained by The Daily Star says Nazrul was detained on August 1, 2023, under Saudi Arabia’s cybercrime law, while Sweety was detained the following day over alleged adultery. Both worked as cleaners for Al Majal Company. The memo does not explain how these earlier allegations relate to the offence cited in the execution announcement.

What is ta’zir under Islamic law?

Ta’zir refers to discretionary punishment in Islamic criminal jurisprudence for offences that do not fall under hadd or qisas. Hadd concerns offences associated with prescribed punishments in classical Islamic jurisprudence, while qisas concerns retribution for offences such as murder and bodily injury. Under ta’zir, judges determine the appropriate punishment within the applicable legal framework. The US Library of Congress describes law penalties as being imposed at a judge’s discretion, drawing on interpretations of the Quran and hadith.

Saudi Arabia’s criminal justice system draws on Islamic jurisprudence and has historically lacked a comprehensive codified penal code covering every offence and punishment. The kingdom announced plans for a written penal code for discretionary offences in 2021, but reporting reviewed by The Indian Express does not establish whether it has come into force. Judges have consequently had considerable discretion in determining offences and sentences, including under ta’zir.

Saudi authorities said the death sentences were imposed under ta’zir, but have not publicly disclosed the specific conduct, evidence or legal reasoning behind the convictions. The alleged location of the act inside a mosque does not, by itself, explain why the court selected capital punishment. Without the judgments, the basis for the sentences cannot be independently assessed.

Saudi Arabia has changed some ta’zir penalties but has not abolished capital punishment. In 2020, the General Commission for the Supreme Court directed that flogging no longer be used as a ta’zir punishment, replacing it with imprisonment, a fine or both. A separate royal order ended the enforcement of ta’zir death sentences for crimes committed by minors, providing for prison terms of up to 10 years in juvenile detention facilities. These reforms did not abolish the death penalty for adults convicted under ta’zir.

The judgments are needed to establish the charges, the legal principles applied, the evidence considered and the reasoning behind the death sentences. Until they are released, the legal basis for the executions cannot be independently assessed.

Why is Bangladesh seeking answers?

Bangladesh says it was not informed of the executions beforehand. “The consulate was not notified by the Ministry beforehand,” a mission official told The Daily Star. Reuters reported on October 21 that Saudi Arabia had yet to respond to Dhaka’s queries, citing Bangladeshi Foreign Ministry spokesperson Shahidul Karim.

State Minister for Foreign Affairs Shama Obaed Islam said Bangladesh had requested copies of the verdicts, details of the offences and an explanation for the absence of prior notification. The government would decide its next steps after receiving the documents and discussing the matter with Saudi authorities, Reuters reported.

The consular memo raises a further question. The Daily Star reported that a prisoner list received by the consulate on September 30 included the two Bangladeshis but did not disclose their death sentences. Although the list contained brief offence descriptions for other prisoners, it did not provide details of the sentences against Nazrul and Sweety.

A consular official told the media: “It was impossible to link the entries to the executions based on that list alone.”

What remains unknown about the executions?

The Saudi Interior Ministry has confirmed that the sentences were upheld and authorised, but the full judgments have not been made public in the reporting reviewed. Their release would allow the convictions and legal reasoning to be examined more fully. Bangladesh says it is seeking the documents to understand the proceedings and determine whether gaps in consular notification require further action.