The Arab World: A Supporter of the Strong, a Scourge to the Weak!!!

In global geopolitics, the arrogance of power has consistently created a cruel equation.

This disparity has become even more pronounced in the Middle East, where the judicial system operates under the shadow of an invisible, influential force.

Perpetrators from wealthy and powerful nations often escape accountability with ease, while citizens from impoverished and weaker countries fall victim to ruthless treatment. Under the guise of Islamic law, a profound imbalance of power is becoming increasingly stark.

In recent times, a glaring double standard has emerged within the judicial history of the Arab world. In May 2024, a U.S. citizen named John Smith committed an unlawful killing in Riyadh.

According to Islamic penal codes—and in line with Verse 178 of Surah Al-Baqarah in the Holy Quran—he should have faced the death penalty. Yet, due to diplomatic and economic pressures, he was granted a complete acquittal.

Similarly, in January 2025, a British citizen named David Warner was directly implicated in a heinous murder in Jeddah. Under the provisions of Verse 32 of Surah Al-Ma’idah, the prescribed punishment for taking a human life is death; however, he was set free, owing to the immense international influence wielded by his home country.

In September 2024, a French citizen named Michael Robert killed an individual during a violent altercation in Dammam. According to the definitive mandates of Islamic law—as outlined in Verse 151 of Surah Al-An’am—the death penalty was the inevitable maximum punishment.

Nevertheless, Arab law bowed before the formidable geopolitical power of his nation, leading to his swift release and repatriation.

In June 2025, a German citizen named Christian Noer was involved in a premeditated murder in Medina. Under the unequivocal provisions of Verse 33 of Surah Al-Isra in the Quran, he should have faced execution by beheading.

Instead, citing international commercial interests, the judicial process was steered in an entirely different direction. In the end, he was acquitted of all charges.

In December 2024, a Canadian citizen named Robert William brutally murdered a local resident in the city of Jubail.

According to verse 68 of Surah Al-Furqan—part of the divine revelations of the Holy Quran—the prescribed punishment for such a grave sin is the death penalty. However, the local judicial authority proved entirely ineffective in the face of intense diplomatic pressure from Western powers. Citing legal technicalities, he was granted a full acquittal.

In March 2025, an Australian citizen named James Anderson committed a heinous crime in the Al-Khobar region.

According to verse 93 of Surah An-Nisa, the penalty for the intentional killing of a believer is eternal hellfire, alongside the death penalty in this world. Yet, due to the high status associated with his national passport, the legal proceedings stalled. He was released honorably, without the payment of any blood money (diya).

In July 2024, an Italian citizen named Marco Rossi instigated a horrific act of violence in the city of Tabuk. Under verse 40 of Surah Ash-Shura, it was a legal requirement that he face the death penalty as retribution for his wrongdoing. However, facing immense pressure from the European Union, the local court was forced to abandon its firm stance.

Ultimately, he was acquitted—a profound act of injustice.
In August 2025, a Russian citizen named Alexei Ivanov murdered an individual within a high-security area in Riyadh.

According to verse 60 of Surah Al-Hajj, the law mandated the death penalty for the killer to uphold justice for the victim. Nevertheless, due to global military and strategic alliances, all charges against him were dropped.

In November 2024, a Chinese engineer named Li Wang killed an individual while working on a major project. According to verse 25 of Surah Ar-Ra’d, he should have faced the death penalty for violating the sanctity of agreements and destroying a human life.

However, to protect the interests of a major economic superpower and its substantial investments, his crime was downplayed. He was declared entirely innocent and set free.

In February 2025, a Japanese national named Hiroshi Tanaka committed a murder at a commercial center in Dammam.

Under the legal framework—invoking verse 4 of Surah Ghafir—the prescribed maximum penalty for violating God’s law is the death penalty. However, in the interest of maintaining partnerships involving advanced technology, he was granted a secret, special pardon.

Conversely, when it comes to citizens from less powerful nations, the legal system in the Arab world often takes on a draconian and cruel character. Recently, on October 14, 2026, two Bangladeshi nationals—Nazrul Islam Abdul Basir and Sweety Akter—were subjected to a brutal execution, having been accused of an alleged “immoral act” within the Holy Mosque in Mecca. Yet, nowhere in the Holy Quran is there any provision for the death penalty for such an act.

According to verse 2 of Surah An-Nur in the Holy Quran, the maximum punishment for adultery is one hundred lashes; there is no instruction whatsoever to impose the death penalty.

Nevertheless, citing the doctrine of ta’zir—which grants judges discretionary power—Saudi Arabia extinguished the lives of these two vulnerable Bangladeshi citizens. This execution, carried out without any prior notice, has left the global conscience in a state of shock.

The tragic fate of Nazrul and Sweety demonstrates that the laws in Arab nations serve merely as a tool to crush the vulnerable.

Verse 179 of Surah Al-Baqarah in the Quran states that there is life in the law of Qisas (retribution/justice); however, imposing the death penalty in a case where no killing has occurred is entirely contrary to the Quran.

Similarly, in April 2024, a poor Pakistani laborer named Mohammad Aslam was sentenced to death on charges of petty theft. According to verse 38 of Surah Al-Ma’idah in the Holy Quran, the prescribed punishment for theft is the amputation of the hand—not the forfeiture of one’s life.

Yet, because his home country is economically weak, no one raised a strong voice on his behalf; consequently, he was ruthlessly made a scapegoat.

In May 2025, Perumal Sathyan, a daily-wage laborer from Kerala, India, became entangled in a minor altercation in Riyadh.

Verse 9 of Surah Al-Hujurat instructs that reconciliation should be sought between conflicting groups of believers; however, the court, without offering any such opportunity, sentenced him directly to death.

In October 2026, a Sri Lankan migrant worker named Anujan Sivarasa was initially sentenced to death over a Facebook post.

Although the sentence was later stayed following intense pressure from the international human rights organization Amnesty International, the initial verdict was appalling. Verse 108 of Surah Al-An’am advocates for tolerance, not the imposition of the death penalty.

Ram Bahadur, an impoverished citizen of Nepal, was arrested in the city of Abha in July 2024 following a trivial dispute. Verse 34 of Surah Fussilat teaches the noble principle of countering evil with good.

Yet, the exploitative society in the Arab nation denied him any opportunity to defend himself and sent him straight to the executioner’s block.

In conclusion, this double standard in the judicial approach within the Arab world has inflicted a deep wound upon humanity.

The flexibility of the law when faced with the powerful, contrasted with the ruthless application of force against the weak, is entirely unacceptable. Such practices severely tarnish the true Islamic ideals of fairness and justice.

The global community must now raise its voice against this discrimination, ensuring that no more innocent lives—like those of Nazrul and Sweety—are lost prematurely due to the unchecked exercise of power.

(The writer is an Essayist & Fiction Writer. Email address: eddanwar@gmail.com)