In a dramatic decision that could have far-reaching consequences for cases of ‘forced divorces' in the Kingdom, the High Court in Riyadh has overturned a previous court decision that had divorced a young Saudi couple against their wishes. The High Court overturned a verdict passed by the Al-Jouf Court four years ago that had ordered the separation of the Saudi couple Mansour Al-Taimani and Fatima Al-Azzaz on the grounds that the husband was of an ‘inferior' social status. The case has been widely reported in the local and international media. The couple had been married in 2003, with the consent of Al-Azzaz's father, as required under Saudi law. However, when her father died, her half brothers approached the court in Al-Jouf to dissolve the marriage, arguing that her husband, Al-Taimani, was of a so-called inferior class. Al-Azzaz refused to divorce her husband because she claimed that her brothers were using this argument as a pretext to get control of her property. However, the Al-Jouf court ruled in favor of her brothers. The judge annulled the marriage contract and ordered Al-Azzaz to spend the three-month waiting period (‘Iddah) alone. The judge also ordered the immediate implementation of the verdict. After the decision by the court, they were forced to live apart. Al-Azzaz then lived in a social protection home for divorced women because she could did not want to live with her brothers and did not want any of them to be her guardian.Saudi law requires all women to have her closest blood relative as her legal guardian. In its judgment overruling the Al-Jouf decision that was approved by the Court of Cassation, the Riyadh High court stated that the marriage was legal because Al-Azzaz's father had given his permission. The High court had also taken into consideration that the couple have two young children, Nuha, 6, and Suleiman, 4. The two were also leading a happy life “full of love and harmony” when they had been forcibly separated, the court ruled. Human rights advocates within Saudi Arabia have contested the ruling in Al-Azzazi's case arguing that it is not a correct interpretation of Shariah. The National Society of Human Rights has reportedly submitted two studies conducted by Islamic scholars stating that if a woman's legal guardian represented her at the wedding, then other relatives have no right to object to the marriage based on compatibility, rather this right could only be exercised by the married woman. Following the decision of the High Court, Al-Taimani said that justice has finally prevailed. The decision came after a list of objections was submitted to the High Court against the ruling of the Jouf general court. This was supported by the Court of Cassation, he said. Al-Taimani thanked all those who had supported their case throughout the four-year-old ordeal during which he was taking care of his daughter while his son was staying with his mother at a social protection home in Dammam. Al-Taimani said he was still waiting for an official copy of the verdict after which he would be united with his family. In a phone call following the decision, the wife said that the verdict had ended the misery of their long and unfair separation. Al-Azzaz thanked the King for advancing the cause of justice in her case. She also expressed appreciated for the work of the Human Rights Commission and its former chairman Turki Al-Sudairi and lawyer Ahmad Al-Sudairi for their support before the court. “I was overwhelmed when I received the court's decision from the lawyer. We are so happy to be a family again,” she said. Al-Azzaz is waiting now to be discharged from the social protection home and join her husband in Riyadh. “We still need to decide in which city we will live,” she added. When asked about the reaction of her family, especially her brothers, who wanted the divorce, she said: “May Allah protect us.” Azzaz Al-Azzaz, Fatima's brother, said that the family has not received anything official about the new verdict which overturns the original divorce. “But we object to this new verdict and we intend to appeal the case, however,” he added.
