Although in Saudi Arabia it is possible for King Abdullah to grant reprieves for executions; human rights campaigners are once again calling for the abolition of the death penalty in that country. Concerns have been expressed as to the fairness of trials in Saudi Arabia, where there is no penal code, no formal definitions of what constitutes a crime, and judgments are based on the judges’ personal interpretations of religious teachings rather than on law. The country has attracted much criticism for being one of the few remaining to execute juvenile criminals.

The case of Abdullah al-Shammari demonstrates the capriciousness of the Saudi justice system. In 1983 the courts found that he killed another man in a fight, by hitting him on the head with a metal object. In the 1990s this was reduced to ‘quasi-intentional murder’ and al-Shammari was ordered to pay blood money. After payment he was freed and proceeded to marry, fathering children. He was then sentenced to death by a review court, which ruled that the murder was ‘intentional.’ The cause of death was believed to be head injuries. King Abdullah following a last minute reprieve is now studying his case, but this offers little certainty to him or his family.

In 2008 Saudi Arabia executed over 92 persons, mostly by public beheadings without warning to the victims or their families. Two recent beheadings were for dealing amphetamines, which is not among the severe crimes for which international law still accepts the death penalty as punishment.
By retaining the death penalty juveniles, the kingdom is also in contravention of the Convention of the Rights of the Child, to which it is a party. Recent cases include the execution of a 16-year-old in July 2007, for a crime he committed aged 13.