User:Hasani Salaam/sandbox

Article Evaluation-- Human Rights Group

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? The details in the article were relevant.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article appears to be unbiased.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented? I feel as if the article should've had more views of what a human rights group isn't and give real life examples of some human rights group.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes, all the links work. The sources were more of general information that the person who created the article used to gather ideas.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Some of the sources are neutral, some are not. They also use Wikipedia references throughout the article.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? More views examples of actual human rights groups and what they support.

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There aren't any conversations being made about the article.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? At the start it's rated as Start-Class. At mid it's rated as Mid-Importance.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This article didn't go as in depth as we did in class, however they did distinguish the differences between a human rights group and political or government based group.

Qatif Rape Case

In this article I believe that I could add more background information about the case and the Islamic culture. It isn't explained why the girl was afraid to be seen alone with a man not related to her, and through this explanation the topic of her lack of rights as a female in that society could be discussed. Despite her unwillingness to be alone with the man she did not know, the victim was still persecuted by seven unknown men. They punished her by taking multiple turns each, gang raping her. As if being gang raped wasn't enough, she was then punished by the court for disobeying the religious law of being alone with a man without permission. In terms of human rights, the victim's basic rights of being able to say no, or be in a safe environment was denied. Her right to walk away or deny the man of seeing her was taken away because of the fear created within her of breaking the law. She was denied the right to fully prosecute her attackers, and was shamed even more the moment the courts decided to press charges against her and violently punish her publicly. The punishment given to her only further encouraged women NOT to speak up about being attacked or violated by unknown men. I have found some sources that discuss the courts reason for WHY they punished the girl, and also a breakdown of the Islamic culture and how this punishment is a paradox to the words written in the Quran.

Hasani Salaam (talk) 16:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Hasani Salaam

Article Outline

Main Point: Despite King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia's attempts to silence Western critics by pardoning the female victim's sentence, his ruling created more turmoil and outrage.

Basic Point 1: Some people had reactions of indignation over previous cases that weren't pardoned as well.

- "'What about others who do not get the ability to make a public case of their problems in the courtrooms, do not they deserve a look that creates a better process for everyone in the country to get their rights'"

- the element or idea of everyone having human rights or being entitled to human rights and the protection of these inalienable rights

Basic Point 2: Others believed that the King needed to change or update Saudi Arabia's laws and judicial system.

- "'Interpretations can vary from judge to judge'"

- this can lead to some very cruel punishments or on the other had lenient punishments

- the Islamic laws are based off the ancient words of their religious book, the Koran

Basic Point 3: People viewed this case as being typically seen as the woman being the only victim in this case, but her male companion was raped as well.

- "'For many Liberals, woman-as-victim rather than freedom and justice-for-all serves as the basic interpretive template for the Qatif story'"

- because he had her in his car against her will his trauma is ignored --> maybe some viewed his rape as karma

- why was his punishment not pardoned as well??

Hasani Salaam (talk) 02:44, 12 October 2017 (UTC) Hasani Salaam

Outline Your Contribution

-The Wikipedia article I will be contributing to is the "Qatif Rape Case". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatif_rape_case

-The entry on Wikipedia discusses the victim's description of the night she was assaulted, and also discusses the court case and the verdict. The article mentions but doesn't go into depth about the injustice and inequality the victim suffered at the hands of the judicial court. It also went on to mention how the case received extreme media attention because of how it violated human rights, and because of this the king pardoned the case. The king's decision about the case attracted public attention from major leaders around the world.

-The main points I will be adding to the article are: 1. The lack of resolution in the judicial system: There is no definite set of laws, or clear order. Sentences and punishments are handed to defendants based purely off of the opinion of the judges ruling over the cases. Some judges could give severely harsh punishments while others could give very lenient punishments. The indecisiveness in choosing the path of people's life is unethical. There should be a clear set of guidelines made for trials.

2. The violation of human rights within the courts: Rulings are unethical and are only based off the Islamic Law. There should be a separation between religious and secular life when it comes to government and the judicial system.

3. A viewpoint of the Saudi Arabian court from a Middle Eastern perspective: Insight from the viewpoint of a Saudi Arabian, would show why they hold their court to be so sacred. The government system is based off of their Islamic laws, or the Shari'ah. The Shari'ah comes from their Holy Qur'an, and "there is no difference between the sacred and the secular aspects of society" (Royal Embassy).

Draft
Lead

The article I will be adding to, The Qatif Rape case, was a controversial legal battle between A Saudi Arabian rape victim and the judicial system that went viral nationwide. A young woman was brutally gang raped by seven men when they found her alone with a male companion who was not a relative. The case caused a stir because the rights of the victim were arguably denied when she was also prosecuted by the judges on the case and given a harsher punishment than some of her rapists. I will be creating new sections within the article that deal with the judicial system, violation of human rights, and an insight into the Middle Eastern government.

Reform in Judicial System

Within the Saudi Arabian judicial system, there is no clear set of laws for citizens to follow; no manual or form of legal document that judges use when approaching cases. Because of this, sentences and punishments are handed to defendants off of the mere judgment of the judge on the case. This practice leads to bias within the courthouse when instead there should only be facts and law. Some judges could give harsher, longer punishments while other judges might give mild punishments. There is no clarity when it comes to the verdict that might be given at trial in the Saudi Arabian courthouses. It is unethical to practice law based off of opinion. In order to prevent further violations of human rights, the Saudi Arabian government needs to create a set of guidelines on the way trials need to be held and run. These guidelines MUST be followed by all judges to create a uniform system.

Violation of Human Rights

In Middle Eastern countries, majority of the governmental systems are integrated with religious beliefs. Many Islamic beliefs hinder the freedom of women in their everyday lives. Because of their gender, women are discriminated against and given less freedom of choice than men in Saudi Arabia. A system should be created that protects women's rights and gives them the freedom to make major decisions in their life like who to marry, how to dress, and where they should be allowed to travel. The men of Saudia Arabia need to respect the rights of women because they were born with natural, human rights same as men. Human rights are inalienable: they cannot be taken away. It is not ethical to decide who is and isn't entitled to them based off of religious beliefs. A separation between the secular and religious life in Saudi Arabia would help to enable that everyone is entitled to their human rights.

Middle Eastern Government

Because majority of the population in Middle Eastern countries practices the religion of Islam, everyday life and practices are integrated with religious beliefs. These countries hold their court to be sacred because the laws are based off their Islamic practices. The government system is based off of their Islamic laws, or the Sharia. The Sharia comes from their Holy Qur'an, and "there is no difference between the sacred and the secular aspects of society" (Royal Embassy). The treatment of women comes from the idea that they are beneath men and that their purity needs to be protected. More than anything they hold their laws regarding women to be the most important. Because of this, the judges viewed the rape victim's defiance against the law as a punishable act along with her rapists' actions, despite what she went through.

- -

Hasani Salaam (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2017 (UTC) Hasani Salaam