The penal court in Makkah recently issued a judgment to imprison a girl for 48 hours for insulting members of the Commission for Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (Haia). She was accused of throwing her shoe at one of the Haia members when they yanked her brother from the family vehicle. Naturally, throwing a shoe at an employee and insulting him while he is carrying out his duty is unacceptable, but what was the reason the girl threw a shoe at them? Here are the events of this strange incident that occurred a year ago. It reads something like a film script. Since that time the case has been in court. According to newspaper reports, the girl was traveling with her mother and brother to Makkah's Al-Nakasah district, but her brother's car grazed a Haia vehicle in heavy traffic. When they stopped, the commission's members suspected that the girl was in illicit seclusion. The unlucky brother, who did not find any other car to graze except that of the Haia, was imprisoned for 49 days pending hearing in the case. Why? We do not know! Was this detention due to charges of illicit seclusion, which was nullified immediately when the girl proved to the commission members that he was her brother? Or was it due to scratching the Haia car? Or did he participate with his sister in the attack with shoes against the Haia members? If he had done that, the court would have definitely issued a verdict against him as well. As to the girl, she is very lucky because the original verdict was to lash her with a whip 50 times. But the verdict for lashes of the whip was nullified after many objections to the verdict. The appeals court rejected the verdict twice and it asked the district court judge to exempt her from whiplashes, as she is a government employee and in consideration for her feelings. How considerate have they been about her feelings after this mess? Nobody knows! But as is said, “Something is less severe than another!” We have nothing else to add regarding what was said earlier. The court knows better about the circumstances of the case. But we have a small question: What about the Haia members after it was proved that there was no illicit seclusion? Was what they did against this girl a mistake that necessitates detention, investigation and a sentence from the court or is it that the citizen is always wrong? As to the Haia member, he acts according to personal opinion and he may be right or wrong. Who holds them accountable? The matter is just an individual mistake due to a simple traffic accident that led to suspicion. This led to violating the dignity of a family that was going shopping. This also led to detention, trial and the signing of an undertaking. And while the shoe flew in the air, the girl returned home barefooted with feet stung by thorns on the road. This happens every time. This film has ended and the heroes of the Haia will start looking for a new story. Just don't exaggerate the matter!
