Proposition 54K1154

Proposition de résolution concernant la situation des droits de l'homme en Arabie saoudite et plus particulièrement le cas du blogueur Raif Badawi.

General information ¶

Authors

Ecolo Benoît Hellings
LE Georges Dallemagne
MR Jean-Jacques Flahaux, Olivier Maingain
PS | SP Philippe Blanchart
Vooruit Dirk Van der Maelen

Submission date

June 10, 2015

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

Saudi Arabia fundamental rights resolution of parliament

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB PP VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

June 18, 2015 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

This is an oral report. I am obliged to read it and not to refer to the written report.

The draft resolution was submitted by our colleague, Mr. of Dallemagne. This proposal refers to the development of its proposal for a resolution following the hearing of Ensaf Haidar, the wife of Raif Badawi, on 27 May 2015 in the Committee on Foreign Relations. I would like to thank the Chairman of the Committee for organizing this hearing.

by Mr. Germany said that Mr. Badawi was sentenced in first instance in 2013 to seven years in prison and 600 beats for expressing his opinion on his blog, the Liberal Saudi Network, ⁇ about women’s rights in Saudi Arabia. by Mr. Badawi was subsequently sentenced in appeal in 2014 to ten years of imprisonment, 1,000 beats and a fine of one million Saudi riyals, or 237,000 euros, accompanied by a ban on travel and use of media for a period of ten years after his sentence.

by Mr. Germany has insisted that the situation of Mr. Badawi is far from an isolated case in Saudi Arabia. In view of these facts, our cherished colleague appealed to the federal government. He calls on the federal government to intervene to condemn the situation of Mr. Badawi but also to begin a deeper reflection on the relations that Belgium ⁇ ins with this country. In addition, the author of the resolution requested that it be quickly adopted, simply, dear colleagues, because today we are on June 18 and Ramadan begins on June 18; however, this could be a favorable period for gestures of mercy or grace on the part of the Saudi leaders.

Our colleague Mrs. Capoen recalls her constant attention to the situation of Mr. Raif Badawi and other human rights defenders around the world. She confirmed that many more people are imprisoned in Saudi Arabia for their opinions and that the number of death executions in the first five months of 2015 is already equal to the total number of death sentences in 2014 alone.

Recalling also that Saudi Arabia wishes to hold the presidency of the United Nations Human Rights Council for the tenth cycle 2015-2016, Capoen explained that she supports this proposal for a resolution but preferred not to sign it because it concerns the case of a specific person.

Our colleague Mr. Stéphane Crusnière also recalled his constant attention to the issue of human rights and freedom of expression in Saudi Arabia. He stressed that Raif Badawi’s wife was heard by the Foreign Relations Committee on her own initiative.

In the case of Mr. Badawi, he recalled the importance of freedom of expression which must constitute an absolute and non-negotiable priority of Belgian diplomacy and which guarantees both freedom of religion and freedom of not believing. by Mr. Crusnière therefore pleaded more for freedom of expression and religion and the struggle against all forms of discrimination rather than highlighting one or another group in particular in the spirit, he recalled, from Mr. Crusnière's thesis. Huntington on the shock of cultures.

I would like to point out that the case of Mr. Raif Badawi is symbolic of a clash of ideas that must be considered in a much broader way. It is in fact a person who is a victim of having used his freedom of expression, which must be strongly condemned. I am therefore, dear colleagues, a little distant from the position of Mr. Crusnière about Huntington’s thesis which, in my opinion, should not be so easily pushed back by a reverse of the hand. There are many cultural visions that confront each other and we must be able to identify the liberticide and anti-humanist and even anti-human ideas.

Treatment by Mr. Badawi is such that it was judged that the injuries caused did not allow him to be administered additional strikes until new order. The international community has condemned this situation by the voice of various political leaders, including Amnesty International.

I concluded my speech by insisting on the need for federal entities, due to their competence in arms exports, to be associated with the reflection on our diplomacy.

Mrs Sarah Claerhout recalls that the successive convictions of Mr. Raif Badawi constitutes flagrant violations of the right to freedom of expression. Internal remedies, she recalled, are now exhausted since the Saudi Supreme Court ruled on 7 June 2015 on this case.

As our colleague Sarah Claerhout recalled, Saudi Arabia joined the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 1997. Nevertheless, 90 executions took place in this country in 2014 and the number of death sentences already issued for the first five months already stands at 90. In addition, Saudi Arabia has been elected to the UN Human Rights Council and it even wants – it’s the cherry on the cake – to secure the presidency of the tenth cycle 2015-2016.

Ms. Nele Lijnen highlighted the emblematic character of Mr. Lijnen’s case. Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia, a state in which both freedom of expression and women’s rights are violated. Despite the recent 100th sentence to the death penalty issued in 2015, this country was elected to the UN Human Rights Council. Our colleague called for the adoption of this proposal to send a clear signal to the whole world and to call for respect for human rights, ⁇ in the Middle East. She hopes that this text will support them around the world and support those who are fighting for free speech, even though she recognizes that a resolution has only a small scope.

by Mr. Benoit Hellings recalled that, during his hearing, the wife of Mr. Raif Badawi stressed that her husband’s situation risked not to improve with political pressures against the Saudi authorities. The speaker therefore pointed to the fact that Belgium is heavily dependent on Saudi Arabia not only in terms of the sale of weapons from FN Herstal, but also in energy matters, which prevents our country from adopting a strong and determined position in respect of human rights. He also pointed to the geostrategic role played by Saudi Arabia in supporting Daesh, against which Belgium is fighting in Iraq and Syria.

Our President Mr. Dirk Van der Maelen, emphasized that the international community adopts an ambivalent attitude regarding the Islamic radicalism it fights in Syria and Iraq, while closing its eyes on the support Saudi Arabia provides to radical groups there.

by Mr. Van der Maelen then pleaded for the Foreign Relations Committee to renew its invitation to hear the ambassador of Saudi Arabia, which has remained unanswered so far, and for Belgium to clearly oppose the country’s candidacy for the presidency of the UN Human Rights Council for the tenth cycle 2015-2016.

by Mr. Olivier Maingain was first concerned that all internal appeal routes are now exhausted for Mr. Maingain. Raif Badawi in Saudi Arabia, following the decision of the Supreme Court of 7 June last year. The principle of universality of human rights cannot be subject to criteria of cultural subjectivity. Calling for the coordination of all executive powers in Belgium, Mr. Maingain called for a more determined diplomatic position, which could consist, for example, in reminding the ambassadors of the Member States of the European Union if a new beating session should be inflicted on Mr. Maingain. and Badawi. Indeed, it seems that the diplomacy of dialogue does not bring sufficient results. As Saudi Arabia is also dependent on the income it receives from its oil resources, ⁇ through its relations with Belgium, the speaker pledged that our country does not weaken in its democratic demands and does not limit its action to media protests.

Our colleague Mr. Blanchart emphasized the fact that the situation of Mr. Raif Badawi is not an isolated case in Saudi Arabia, where barbarism is institutionalized, as demonstrated – and it is Mr. Badawi. Blanchart who raised this point – the recent announcement of the engagement of eight new bullies to be able to execute the death penalty there. Therefore, it is a business in full expansion... He pleaded for broad support for this resolution proposal.

Our excellent colleague, Mr. Jean-Jacques Flahaux, highlights the terrible situation of Saudi Arabia in terms of respect for human rights, and women in particular – which, however, has recently been granted the right to vote. Freedom of expression and freedom to exercise a religion are also severely restricted there. Indeed, apostasy is punishable by a sentence to death with the sword. In addition, only Sunniism is recognized as a religion, while 15% of the population is Shia and a million Christians reside in Saudi Arabia, most of them employed as immigrant workers. by Mr. Flahaux highlighted the paradox of the Belgian-Saudi relations, since Belgium buys oil from Saudi Arabia, which uses this financial manna to support international Islamist terrorism, against which – as several members in the commission have mentioned – our country fights, by the way, in Syria and Iraq by participating in the international coalition against Daesh.

by Mr. Wouter De Vriendt welcomed that the issue of human rights, and more ⁇ the inhumane treatment inflicted on Mr. De Vriendt. Raif Badawi is a priority for all political groups. He pointed out that, if this resolution proposal deals with a particular case – that of Mr. Since Badawi is indeed the originator of this approach – points 7 to 10 nevertheless formulate several requests of a more general order, addressed to the government.

These demands are mostly concrete and measurable. He will then belong, and other members including the President Mr. Van der Maelen stressed this, in the committee to check in the short term what will the government and, in particular, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs in the matter. The speaker also reiterated his request to hear the Saudi ambassador.

We then heard the Minister’s representative in the committee. She stated that the Minister shared the concern of the members of the committee regarding the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia and, in particular, the application of bodily punishments such as those imposed on Mr. Trump. by Raif Badawi. The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment to which Saudi Arabia acceded on 23 September 1997. The government notes with relief that the application of new beating strikes on Mr. Badawi has been suspended since January 2015. He is concerned, however, much after the confirmation of the conviction by the Supreme Court.

Following the sentence, the European Union and its Member States immediately reiterated their strong opposition to such treatment or punishment. They called on the Saudi authorities to suspend any corporal punishment against Mr. Trump. Badawi and to consider ending the practice of flagellation. In this regard, the Minister’s Representative regrets that no reference is made in the development and considerations of the resolution proposal submitted by our colleague to the actions carried out by the European Union, which, however, is a key actor on this subject. As with all other countries, the human rights issue is an essential component of Belgium’s bilateral relations with Saudi Arabia. During the Universal Periodic Review of Saudi Arabia in October 2013, Belgium submitted recommendations on freedom of expression and association to the Saudi government. Belgium also addresses the human rights issue on every occasion in its bilateral contacts with the Saudi authorities.

The particular case of Mr. Raif Badawi has been addressed several times by the Belgian authorities, both in Riyadh and in Brussels. The minister himself highlighted his concern on this issue in Geneva, before the Human Rights Council in March 2015. He also addressed the issue in a bilateral interview with Prince Turki Bin Mohammed bin Saud al Kabeer, Deputy Foreign Minister, who led the Saudi Arabia delegation during the meeting between the European Union and the Gulf Cooperation Council at the end of May 2015.

Ms. Haidar, wife of Mr. Badawi was also received by the services of the SPF Foreign Affairs.

According to the Minister’s representative, the Belgian diplomacy will remain mobilized on the issue of human rights in Saudi Arabia and more ⁇ on the case of Mr. Trump. by Raif Badawi. However, it should be emphasized that the Belgian government chooses its interventions based on their effectiveness and that it generally preferred a strong but discreet diplomacy. In order to have a real impact, it is necessary to prioritize engagement and dialogue in order to avoid all doors closing. Belgium will continue to raise the question of human rights and the fate reserved for Mr. Badawi in the days and weeks to come. Finally, the Minister’s representative confirmed that the reflection on the position of the Belgian diplomacy in relation to Saudi Arabia would also be extended to the federal entities of our country.

A few exchanges followed, like the one between Mr. Maingain and myself on the notion of universality. I refer to this in the text that will be published.

by Mr. Germany welcomed the fact that the Commission was able to conduct a serene and high-quality debate on this proposal for a resolution concerning fundamental values in human rights. The primary concern of his text is to end the cruel treatment inflicted on Mr. Badawi, but he did not focus on this single case. In fact, Mr. Badawi has become an iconic figure that personifies the suffering of the Saudi population and the major issues of respect for human rights and security at the international level. The resolution proposal formulates certain specific requests that can be verified and controlled.

M is Dallemagne stressed that the effectiveness of the various initiatives will depend on the voluntarism of the government and the action of the members of the Chamber who will be required to verify the suites given to the present proposal of resolution, as has been stressed by several commissioners. Dallemagne, Maingain, The Friend and Van der Maelen

According to M. From Germany, a hope is allowed. The flagellation sessions were interrupted in January 2015. They did not return despite the recent decision of the Supreme Court that confirmed the conviction of Mr. and Badawi. The judgment of the Supreme Court is final. Badawi can still bring an appeal to the king. If the Saudi authorities were to decide to resume the cruel and degrading treatment of Mr. Badawi, Mr. Germany calls for a strong response from the Belgian government.

The entire draft resolution was adopted unanimously. No amendments have been submitted. In contrast, a technical correction was made, a difference existing between the French text and the Dutch text which may not be sufficiently accurate.

We thank you, Mr. Miller, for your elaborate oral report.

I promised to keep it brief.

The story of Raif Badawi is well known to all of us. It was heavily mediated and colleague Miller just talked about it quite extensively in his report.

I will therefore explain the point of view of N-VA.

Some people, often people of evil will, say that N-VA has no regard for human rights. Nothing is less true, my friends. N-VA is ⁇ concerned with human rights and in the case of Raid Badawi. Unfortunately, I don’t always get through the media wall. I have already asked a number of questions, written a piece of opinion on it, even taken action with colleagues from the opposition and Amnesty International at the Saudi Embassy, and have already taken some action on social media for Amnesty International.

Unfortunately, I was prevented when Ms. Badawi was in Brussels, but I have had personal contact with her several times before and after that.

And if that’s not enough, we have a human rights professor as group leader. That also counts for something.

Important to the case of Badawi is the great international attention that is still there. Canada plays a leading role in this. Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird has strongly condemned Badawi's conviction. The province of Quebec, where his wife and three children live in exile, has launched an emergency procedure to offer Mr Badawi the status of immigrant for humanitarian reasons.

Sweden has already cancelled military cooperation agreements, and the Swedish Foreign Minister, Ms. Wallström, has undertaken a number of demarches against Saudi Arabia.

Raif Badawi is not an isolated case. His lawyer Waleed Abulkhair and several human rights activists are also detained in Saudi Arabia. The track record of Saudi Arabia is very worrying.

In the first half of 2015, more executions were already carried out than in all 2014. These executions are also often very inhumane, such as headlessing with a sword in the middle of the street. Saudi Arabia has announced a vacancy for eight new jobs.

You hear it right, colleagues, eight bulls they need in Saudi Arabia!

But the best joke has yet to come: Saudi Arabia wants to be chairman of the Human Rights Council in 2015-2016. No one in the West can understand this.

This leads me to this resolution. As mentioned earlier, we can find ourselves well in the spirit of this text. Therefore, we support most of the issues in this resolution. However, we have not signed them. This is primarily a principle issue. The N-VA seeks to remain consistent, both in the majority and in the opposition.

Since this resolution is mainly a personal case, we have not signed it, as we have not done so in the past. However, it is hard to pour every shattering case in this world into a resolution. If we did, the Foreign Relations Committee would have to adopt at least ten resolutions every day.

However, this does not mean that we do not agree with this resolution. We expect a clear and strong message from the government. So far, we’ve been a little hungry with the answers to our questions. Especially now that Ramadan begins, often used as a period of grace, it is now time to cry even louder and take action, hopefully this time with more effect.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker Miller, you will have found that what is to be emphasized in this proposal is the very constructive, rich debate and above all the beautiful unanimity that emerged around this text of our cherished Mr. Miller. of DDR. I signed this text without hesitation.

My group has always closely monitored Raif Badawi’s situation. On May 7, 2014, at 11 a.m., before this scandal became public, we were unfortunately only a few to protest in front of the Saudi Arabian embassy. It was my colleague, Stéphane Crusnière, who requested the hearing of Mr. Crusnière’s wife. by Badawi. This resolution continues this exchange of views and several parliamentary questions on the subject, including blasphemy and the situation of women in this country.

To recall, my colleague Mr. Germany said in a statement, the text is about Raif Badawi, a famous Saudi blogger who spoke so much about him in early January, when he suffered a first session of 50 beats. The man was sentenced on May 7, 2014 to ten years in prison, a fine of €260,000 and 1,000 beats, and even faced with the death penalty, which, as mentioned in the report, translates in Saudi Arabia by the decapitation. Why then, dear colleagues? For insulting Islam on his website.

The proposal for a resolution presented today calls on the Belgian government to formally and promptly intervene with the Saudi authorities in favour of Raif Badawi. The text emphasizes that, although the key priority is of course to intervene with the Saudi authorities in order to immediately and unconditionally release Mr. Trump. Raif Badawi, it is also the case that these annul the conviction and the penalties that have been imposed against him, including the ban on leaving the territory.

However, if this text essentially talks about this specific and iconic case, it goes much further. Unfortunately, the case of Badawi is only the emerging side of the iceberg. We need to demand the authorities, not just the unconditional release of Mr. Trump. Badawi and his lawyer, as well as all other human rights defenders and other imprisoned prisoners of conscience, unjustly convicted in Saudi Arabia.

Belgium must actively support Saudi civil society organizations and individuals who defend the rights and freedoms in Saudi Arabia and who work in particular to improve the status of women in Saudi Arabia.

Beyond the questions raised by this resolution or on this particular case, we have always put as one of the absolute priorities of Belgian diplomacy the freedom of expression within the meaning of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and, more generally, the respect for fundamental freedoms, an inalienable and non-negotiable priority, whether it be addressing the situation in Belgium, in Europe or around the world.

Saudi Arabia, of course, does not escape this, despite the power released by its natural resources. I am convinced that freedom of expression de facto and firmly condemns any attempt to incriminate it, especially concerning religious issues, such as the laws relating to blasphemy, a freedom of expression that guarantees the freedom to believe or not to believe and beyond the sacred-holy freedom of expression that we fiercely defend, I want to return to what some have said in committees: no, under no pretext can be questioned the universality of human rights. I am convinced that no culture, no religion, no custom can be used to legitimize violations of these rights.

Therefore, in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, we must as firmly as possible oppose and condemn the use of torture or corporal punishment as well as all violations of human rights, LGBT, minorities, as many populations that have a more than precarious status in this region of the world.

For all these reasons, dear colleagues, we will support this text with strength and vigor.

Beyond political divisions and our ideological, natural and healthy differences within the framework of pluralist democracies, we can and must all gather on a number of principles that guide our common existence within this country.

The universality of human rights remains the fundamental principle that should guide our political action and help us ⁇ the common goals, to which all Member States of the United Nations have subscribed.

(Banders are deployed from the tribune)

(Pants are rolled down from the tribune)

I ask the security community to be willing to remove this.

Obviously, they do not care about the situation in Saudi Arabia. Bravo to the ecologists. There is a duty of discretion, however.

I am continuing. The universality of human rights remains the fundamental principle that should guide our political action and help us ⁇ the common goals to which all the member states of the United Nations have subscribed by signing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The iconic case of Raif Badawi – I recall that he created the blog Free Saudi Liberals – forces us, European Democrats living in a neutral and secular society, to ask us a number of questions, not all having a simple and obvious answer.

These questions in the end concern the universality of human rights, both the criminal or non-criminal character of the facts and the punishment or punishment imposed. Among these questions, these are the most important: can a religion or a current of thought claim to universality and declare its universal values under the pretext that they result from the truth of which it claims to be the sole holder? Then, can religious diversity with its cultural and philosophical differences, the diversity of ideals based on religious, humanitarian, atheist or agnostic convictions, converge towards a common heritage recognized by humanity, therefore universal? Finally, what is the contribution of religious communities to humanity in its quest for universal values?

As a liberal, but also a Christian, I think that the universality of rights and freedoms is not decreed. It is the result of a process of internalization which must lead each person to recognize certain values as inherent in his common humanity. Universality is not an a priori fact but a goal to be achieved through research conducted in intercultural and inter-religious dialogue.

Dear colleagues, is Raif Badawi guilty because he is being tried by a Saudi court? Should Raif Badawi be subjected to a humiliating sentence because he is being tried by a Saudi court? To these two questions, of course, we must answer no. Raif Badawi is found guilty because he is tried, of course, by a court in Saudi Arabia, whose legality can be disputed since it is a special court. He is therefore sentenced to sentences that have been further aggravated in appeal but the substance of the matter concerns the legislation in force in Saudi Arabia, beyond his case. Even if one can save it, then it will remain the case of hundreds of people who, as stated in Richard Miller’s report, have already been sentenced to death in 2014 and the number has already doubled in 2015.

The punishment that is being imposed on Raif Badawi is atrocious and inhuman. There is no other word. Even Saudi Arabia realizes this, as the sentences were supposed to take place every week and for now they are postponed, but not removed, except for the first one. It is a cruel physical punishment that is performed in public, and is formally prohibited by the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The paradox is that Saudi Arabia has ratified this convention and is far from implementing it.

The newspaper Le Monde ⁇ on May 19 that Saudi Arabia is creating “employment” by recruiting eight thieves to carry out scraping and amputating hands in accordance with Sharia law. The job offer even clarifies that no special qualifications or prior experience are required and that positions are paid at the lowest public service index. Where is Dignity?

Mr. President, our country is linked to Saudi Arabia by economic relations that are growing exponentially. This must not, on the contrary, make forgetting the human rights situation in this country, nor the need to combat indignant and, it must be said, medieval behaviors. I insist that our economic relations cannot under no circumstances hide the issues of human rights. Therefore, faithful to our tradition, our Minister of Foreign Affairs denounced these situations and expressed itself very clearly on this subject, recalling our country’s ongoing struggle for the defense of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The particular case of Raif Badawi has been addressed several times by Belgium in both Riyadh and Brussels.

I would like to quote here, however, the speech to the European Parliament of our MEP Gérard Deprez who said: "What is tragic and unbearable in the cruel treatment inflicted on Mr. Deprez. Badawi is that this is not an isolated case or a scandal that would be attributable to overly zealous repressive services. What is tragic and unbearable is that it is a system. Worse, this system is a legal system, developed, built and implemented by the institutions of a country that we consider an ally country. It is a terrible and unbearable punishment that is inflicted on him. Badawi, it is not only the brutality of the beats that are being inflicted on him, it is that these beats are given to him for apostasy, that is, for insults to Islam, even when he simply used the internet to fuel a democratic debate. What is tragic and unbearable in the brutality of the punishment inflicted on Mr. “Badawi, it’s that there’s basically no difference in nature between some of Daesh’s wild practices, which I prefer to call the Nazi Islamists that we’re bombing, and some of Saudi Arabia’s wild but legal practices that we have.”

I believe this is an important point and we will not escape a deeper debate beyond the Badawi case.

The foreign minister himself highlighted his concern over the matter in Geneva before the Human Rights Council in March. He also reiterated this in a bilateral interview recently recalled by Richard Miller with the Deputy Foreign Minister.

We maintain a close and demanding dialogue with all states, including Saudi Arabia, on the human rights situation, in the most appropriate formats for these bilateral dialogues, but also at the United Nations through the Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council. This has just been stressed. What is disgusting is that, on the one hand, Saudi Arabia has been in the Human Rights Committee for three years, and, on the other hand, it has applied for its presidency.

We can hope that his presence in the Human Rights Committee can be an argument for the sentence to be postponed or even lifted.

The Belgian Parliament is honored to vote unanimously on this resolution, thus sending a clear political message to Saudi Arabia.

We will also need to talk about the need to re-establish the rights of the prosecutor in Saudi Arabia, to establish freedom of the press and to abolish special courts. Certainly, a very small step has just been made in terms of women’s rights, since – in theory, as there has not yet been any practical consequence – women will now be able to vote in Saudi Arabia. You can’t drive, but you can vote. Know who can.

In any case, we must continue the dialogue and continue to exert pressure to improve the situation and release Mr. Trump. by Badawi.

I take advantage of it to point out that yesterday, in Canada, his book was published: A hundred beats because I dared to speak freely, being a collection of the texts of his blog since 2011.

I thank you for your attention.

Hopefully, we will immediately, unanimously, adopt a good draft resolution. Parliament will have to follow the resolution carefully to ensure that the government also implements it. There have already been a lot of beautiful resolutions passed, without prompting the government to act.

A relevant question arises, which is reflected in paragraph 11 of the text: how will we deal with the Saudi regime if we show our indignation over the abomination and human rights violations in the country. Will we limit ourselves to a public charge against the torture and imprisonment of Raif Badawi, or will we go further? In any case, this is a first, careful step, but an important step. It is good that the majority of the parties also fully support the proposal.

What happened to Raif Badawi is unfortunate. Just recently, on June 7, the Supreme Court of Saudi Arabia confirmed his sentence to 10 years in prison and 1,000 beats. For the lovers among us, it’s about twenty sets of fifty beats, with each one a week in between. In fact, they are not beats, but beats with a light wooden stick, especially targeted at the back, legs and knees, light enough not to cause fractures, but heavy and painful enough to cause cramping. That’s how Saudi Arabia punishes people who have freely expressed their opinions through a blog, who have questioned the place of religion in Saudi Arabia’s society in a very normal, non-violent way.

However, Saudi Arabia has backed and ratified a number of international laws, which actually prohibit such torture. The International Convention against Torture was ratified in 1997.

It is also important that this is not an isolated case. I think the proposal for a resolution correctly points out this in that sense. I have already said it in the committee and so I will not go into this too long but the points 8, 9, 10 and ⁇ 11 broaden the text and ask the government to condemn all bodily punishment and torture and support the organizations in Saudi Arabia who oppose such human rights violations.

Saudi Arabia violates human rights in a very bold and systematic way. Reports from Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch speak of the imprisonment of dissidents without any kind of trial. There are public deprivations and just mention them.

I would like to briefly quote from an Amnesty International report, the 15th report of last year. It is about unfair justice and new legislation in Saudi Arabia that equates criticism of the government, peaceful activities and forms of normal opposition to terrorism and also treats and punishes as such. Abuse of persons in prison. Apparently this is ⁇ very frequently. Discrimination of women in all possible ways. These include the use of the death penalty and dozens of public executions.

The report of Human Rights Watch points out that political dissidents and human rights activists remain imprisoned solely for non-violent activities. There is a systematic discrimination not only against women but also against religious minorities. In addition, there is little use of minimum social standards in the treatment of nine million foreign workers. There is – I repeat it – the new anti-terrorism legislation that equates normal opposition to terrorism and there are the beating and torture, not only of Raif Badawi but also of many, many others. The report also talks about the death penalty for those accused of witchcraft and witchcraft.

The question, then, colleagues, is how we deal with it, especially because we might need to see the debate a little wider in the context of international politics. The elites in Saudi Arabia are key financiers of violent terrorism, worldwide. Saudi Arabia is funding the export of a violent form of Sunniism, wahabism. This translates into extremely violent salafism outside of Saudi Arabia. There is a sectarian policy.

At the same time, we must, of course, say that the sectarian discourse that some use here in the West hides many social inequalities and a policy of power, and that is not just about the division between Sunni and Shiite. We cannot deny that Saudi Arabia plays an important role in promoting and reinforcing terrorism in Libya, Gaza, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan through IS, Al Qaeda and the Taliban. We are also facing this terrorism.

What do we do as Belgium and as Europe? In 2011 there was a democratic protest in Bahrain. These protests were widely democratically carried out, especially among the Shiite community in Bahrain. Saudi Arabia invaded Bahrain to suppress the protest. The armored vehicles that were then invaded in Bahrain were partly Flemish. We are talking about 2011, just four years ago. Apparently we think it is possible that our Flemish industry implements such technology, that that technology ends up in Saudi Arabia and that the country uses that technology for violent repression in a country like Bahrain.

What do we still do? We organize royal visits to Saudi Arabia. We do not seem to mind that either.

A few months ago, King Philip made another visit to Saudi Arabia and that visit was covered by the government, thus by the N-VA, the MR, CD&V and the Open Vld. In this way, we really legitimize a villain regime and it is time to stop it. Let us therefore act in the spirit of this resolution and ensure that such visits are no longer possible in the future. After all, we have sent a very cynical signal, not only to human rights activists around the world, but also to other countries that violate human rights. Indeed, our message to Saudi Arabia is actually one of “do but”. It is the message that they can continue to treat Raif Badawi, and many others, as they do. When it comes point by point, our King will visit there and a tour will be made to make as many economic deals as possible.

Third, the trade relations. We export technology that allows Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and we organize royal visits. Apparently, we also do not mind that the trade relations between Belgium and Saudi Arabia are growing. I have a note from the Agency for Foreign Trade, on the trade relations of Belgium with Saudi Arabia. On pages 5 and 6, beautiful graphs show the evolution of exports to Saudi Arabia and imports from Saudi Arabia. These figures are going in a rising line. What is our Minister of Foreign Affairs waiting for and what is State Secretary De Crem waiting for to make a public statement? Our business world can also be made aware of the countries with which business is done. Such a signal seems to me perfectly possible, but to date it is still waiting for it.

In the longer term, the key point in the resolution is actually our Question 11 to the Belgian Government to submit the Belgian diplomatic, military, economic, commercial and energy-related relations with Saudi Arabia to a thorough reflection, given what we all conclude. Please let us work on that. Mr. Van der Maelen, we can work on this in the committee that you chair. We share a shared responsibility to make this work.

I am pleased that the majority parties also realize that this is necessary and that we do not leave it with the although sharp, harsh and critical condemnation of what happened, and still happens, with Raif Badawi, but that we must take a step further.

I look forward to this discussion and hope that we can conduct it in all openness and serenity, under the banner of respect for human rights. After all, that is a value that we share, beyond the boundaries of majority and opposition.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Dallemagne for his initiative and Mr. Miller for his excellent report. In particular, I would like to thank my colleagues in the committee for the smooth cooperation and the rich debate we have held which, rather exceptional, led to the unanimous adoption of this resolution.

As for my own position, I refer to my presentation in the committee. I agree with you that, as promised at the last committee meeting, for the second time I have sent an invitation to the Ambassador of Saudi Arabia in Brussels to engage in dialogue with us on this issue.

Finally, I regret that in this plenary session we must once again conduct an important debate in the absence of the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

I will not be too long; the debate has already been extremely developed in the committee. It took place in an extremely dignified and comprehensive manner, as the Chairman of the Commission recalled.

All the interventions that took place in the plenary session converged at the level of analysis, which I welcome. Indeed, the resolution to be examined has, first and foremost, the vocation to save the life of a man – this is obviously important – at the request of his wife, a courageous, dignified wife, who travels the planet and who came to see us, in particular thanks to Mr. Crusnière who asked us to receive it.

Of course, we hope to be able to save this man’s life, to make sure that he is no longer subjected to ⁇ cruel punishments and that he can be released. This man was convicted for serenely and calmly expressing on a blog ideas relating to freedom, human dignity. It is quite hallucinating that in the twenty-first century a man may be condemned to undergo such degrading and inhumane treatment that could cost him his life, as our colleague Nele Lijnen recalled.

I would like to thank all the co-authors, but also the services that have enabled us to vote on this resolution today.

This is a ⁇ iconic case, an extremely shocking situation in respect of human rights in Saudi Arabia. Indeed, with regard to the convictions, treatments, and prison sentences which are the subject of some for apostasy, for homosexuality, for expressing opinions freely or for belonging to religious minorities, the situation in this country can be regarded as one of the worst in the world in respect of human rights.

We absolutely need to rethink the future of our relations with this country. We are really at a turning point, we can no longer close our eyes. Why does Saudi Arabia behave this way today? Because this country has never suffered any form of sanction or reproof from the international community! This has been going on for so many years because we have turned our eyes away from this country, while we were aware of the situation. We closed our eyes and it was unbearable. This must change. I really hope that our diplomacy will finally start this turn and that we will have a deep discussion, also with the federal entities. Saudi Arabia cannot remain the main partner in terms of arms. This country threatens its population and threatens the stability and security of the world today. This must be said and repeated. This is also why I am pleased that we have this unanimity.

I’ll finish by saying how impressed I was by the wife of mr. Badawi, by the dignity and modernity of this woman, by her courage, sober, simple, but determined to free her husband. She was one of us, she was a world citizen. It showed how much women and men in Saudi Arabia deserve, like us, freedom and dignity.

Mr. Speaker, what justifies that there is a coalition that has mobilized to denounce the caliphate that Daesh wants to establish, is what Saudi Arabia does in its internal functioning when it applies Islamic law, with a rigour worthy of a barbaric regime. We cannot today denounce the rise in power of the Islamic State and close our eyes to the fact that in the coalition that fights the Islamic State, Saudi Arabia practices Islamic law with a rigour that goes back to another time, a time when barbarism dictated the behavior of regimes.

Saudi Arabia, it is known, condemns those and those who dare to disobey the king. This is a reason for condemnation. As mentioned by Mr. From Germany and others, apostasy, witchcraft, which is obviously a deeply unfair trial, and other forms of crimes created to condemn freedom of expression justify the worst punishments.

The Badawi case was probably the reveal of these very many executions. Unfortunately, Saudi Arabia has the sad privilege of being in the top 3 of the countries that practice the most death penalty, along with Iran and Iraq. It is a neighborhood that is not flattering. Simply because Saudi Arabia has not agreed to translate into its domestic law, despite attempts to reform its judicial system, the international conventions it ratifies and signs. If you read, she often mentions a reservation that is “compatibility of international conventions with Islamic law.” Particularly for the Convention against All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, there is an express mention of Saudi Arabia as a reservation with regard to the application of this Convention with regard to Islamic law.

Therefore, it is time for European diplomacy, and this is a role that we care about, to assume with more firmness a will towards Saudi Arabia. I have denounced with others the presence of our king at the funerals or at least at the tribute ceremonies that followed the death of King Abdullah.

I did so, not because it was necessary to denounce a traditional attitude in diplomatic relations, but because, unless we gradually begin to make strong gestures, there will be no acceptance by Saudi Arabia of an awareness of its international obligations. We need to have that will now. The proposed resolution is probably a message to our government to make such gestures.

I suggested that, if the punishment should again be inflicted on Mr. Badawi, Belgium may recall its ambassador. It should also be suggested to other European capitals a collective approach of this scale. This is the only way to get our allies, especially in the international coalition – led by the United States, whose privileged ties with Saudi Arabia are known to us – to weigh all their weight on the latter to put an end to these practices of another time, which are unworthy of the civilization we know.

Mr. Dewinter, you were not registered in the general discussion, but you are still asking the word?

Mr. Speaker, I did not deliberately register, but after listening to the debate, I would like to make a few comments.

First, of course, I fully agree with the proposal for a resolution on the state of human rights in Saudi Arabia and the situation of the world-famous blogger Raif Badawi, but this is not the case.

What I want to talk about is the hypocrisy of some parties that I have heard here hold fair statements. If one condemns and attacks Salafism in Saudi Arabia, one must be consistent.

It is easy to approve a resolution here without obligation, another in a long row, after which the conscience has once again shaken and we have done our duty. No one here, and ⁇ not in Saudi Arabia, who is awake from such resolutions.

What they are awake of is the political relationships we maintain with them. Not only the political relations we maintain with them, but also the facilities that they and their regime and especially the religious orientation they represent, wahabism, salafism, in Europe, in Belgium, in Brussels.

I find it hypocritical to vote on such a resolution today, but to have no problem as members of the royal family, together with ministers of the federal government, as last year was the case with Princess Astrid, to travel to gender to dance there to the pipes of the regime and say how good and how fantastic it is all, as long as there are only cents in Saudi Arabia can be earned.

Then I find it hypocritical to assert that we tolerate that same Saudi Arabia as a partner in the coalition against ISIS, while Saudi Arabia ultimately represents and propagates a trend within Islam that is at least as radical, as fanatic, as extreme and as dangerous as ISIS and Saudi Arabia behind the scenes supports terrorism, supports Al Qaeda terrorism, supports Wahhabist and Salafist terrorism around the world.

Then I find it hypocritical to approve such resolutions and make non-binding statements about Saudi Arabia, but to tolerate the central mosque in our country, which is financed, managed and organized directly from Saudi Arabia, just one and a half kilometers from here, in the Jubilee Park of Brussels. The ground was then made available by the Belgian government to be in favor of the Saudis in the wake of the famous oil crisis.

What the Saudis are doing in our country and throughout Europe is building up their religious orientation, Salafism, Wahabism, with the support of the local authorities, who close an eye when it comes to mosques like those in the Jubilee Park and many others in our country; when it comes to madrasas and Koran schools financed from Saudi Arabia. Or when it comes to the many Muslim organizations that are funded with the oil dollars of the Saudis so that they can put their activities in practice here thanks to the Saudis. This is obviously a problem for no one.

Well, if that’s not a problem, you’d actually better be silent about Saudi Arabia in this kind of resolutions. Be consistent, do what you really can do, point out that Saudi Arabia cannot be our partner in the fight against so-called radical Muslim extremism when it itself is equally extremist and dangerous. Tell the Saudis that we no longer tolerate that they use their money to open and organize mosques here, and propagate their aspirations here. Do not send trade missions to Saudi Arabia with foreign ministers, princes and princesses, kings and queens. Then your criticism will sound credible for once.

I would like to return to one point raised by my colleague. Blanchart, to whom I would like to answer. Since the rapporteur’s ingrate role is not to get too much into the explanation of what he says, I would nevertheless want to be clear about the universality of human rights. This discussion was discussed in the committee by Mr. by Maingain.

There is no question of the universality of human rights. What I intended to say is that there is a certain contradiction in stating that rights are universal when they actually apply to a very small portion of humanity and that there are billions of individuals who do not enjoy these human rights.

In other words, the universality of human rights is not an achievement. This is a struggle that continually demands to be carried out and on all the levels that have been discussed during the debate on the proposed resolution that has been submitted. It is a struggle that must be fought on the political, economic, legal, diplomatic level and also – that’s what I meant – on the level of ideas and philosophies.

I really wanted to clarify this.