By Dr. Abdelaziz Tarekji
At a critical moment in Saudi Arabia’s trajectory—a time of unprecedented regional and global achievements—Amnesty International has chosen to release a report accusing the Kingdom of a surge in executions, particularly for drug-related offenses. This comes despite the sweeping reforms driven by Vision 2030 and the transformative leadership of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The timing of the report raises serious questions: is this truly about human rights, or a political agenda disguised as advocacy?
1. Legal Perspective: Justice in Saudi Arabia or Selective International Pressure?
Amnesty International’s report claims that 2024 witnessed the highest number of executions in decades, totaling 345, with over a third tied to drug crimes and 75% involving foreign nationals.
Saudi Arabia’s Legal Response:
• Judicial Sovereignty: The Kingdom enforces the death penalty only after due legal process, exhausting all levels of appeal. Many of the cases are linked to terrorism and serious crimes threatening national security.
• International Law Compatibility: While global norms favor restricting capital punishment, international law does not prohibit it outright. Sovereign states retain the right to legislate and enforce severe penalties within the bounds of fair trial guarantees.
• Real Threats: The surge in executions for drug offenses reflects a genuine national security concern. Saudi Arabia faces aggressive smuggling operations targeting its society, justifying firm legal deterrence.
2. Socioeconomic Reforms: Tangible Progress Ignored
• Vision 2030: A bold national agenda transforming the Kingdom socially and economically, empowering women, diversifying the economy, and fostering cultural and entertainment sectors.
• Diplomatic Reconciliation: Saudi Arabia has spearheaded regional reconciliation, enhancing Gulf unity and contributing to broader Arab stability.
• Peace Initiatives: The Kingdom has proposed and supported political solutions to conflicts in Yemen, Syria, and Libya, confirming its role as a peace broker, not a warmonger.
3. Who is Mohammed bin Salman? The Architect of Change
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman leads with vision and resolve:
• Lifting restrictions on women and expanding public freedoms.
• Liberalizing the economy and launching mega-projects.
• Supporting humanitarian and reconstruction efforts across the region.
• Garnering global support for a Nobel Peace Prize nomination due to his contributions to regional stability and counterterrorism.
4. Suspicious Timing: Is the Report Politically Motivated?
• The report’s release coincides with international praise for Saudi reform efforts and rising support for the Crown Prince’s peace-building agenda.
• It raises the possibility that vested interests seek to derail Saudi Arabia’s resurgence and the emergence of a stable, independent Arab model.
5. Amnesty International’s Credibility in Question
Amnesty is expected to act impartially. However, its latest report is laced with emotionally charged language like “alarming increase” without substantive legal context or evidence of systematic abuse.
When reports shift from objectivity to advocacy laced with bias, they compromise the very ideals they claim to uphold.
6. Mischaracterization of Justice as Violence
Claims that the Kingdom has failed to explain the spike in executions ignore the judicial context: all cases are adjudicated transparently. The death penalty is applied as a deterrent against crimes that jeopardize public safety, not as a tool of oppression.
Saudi Arabia today is a nation investing in justice, development, and diplomacy. It deserves to be judged fairly, not through politically skewed lenses.
“To the world: Saudi Arabia is facing its challenges through reform, not repression. It builds, reconciles, and leads by example—let us stand with its transformation, not against it.”
When human rights rhetoric is wielded for geopolitical aims, it risks losing its soul. The Kingdom extends its hand in humanitarian aid, mediation, and growth, yet is met with misplaced criticism.
Respect for international law and human rights principles must be rooted in consistency and integrity, not manipulated to serve hidden agendas.
I do not write to defend Saudi Arabia—a sovereign nation that needs no defense from me or anyone else. But as a human rights advocate, I was compelled to respond to Amnesty International’s misleading portrayal, which strays from neutral legal critique into the realm of politicized distortion.
I speak from a place of neutrality and truth-seeking, and from a sincere admiration for a nation that represents, to me, the free Arab core in a world increasingly governed by double standards and political opportunism.
Our criticism must aim to preserve the true essence of human rights—not reduce it to a weapon against nations that choose their own path to peace and progress.
