Soleha, a criminal or a victim?

Soleha Anam Kadiran, a domestic helper hailing from East Java, was reported beheaded by sword in Saudi Arabia after an Islamic court had found her guilty of killing a Saudi woman with an ax. Your editorial from Oct. 22 says, "... it is the form of punishment prescribed for the crime committed by the laws of the land in which it occurred, and must be respected." This tolerance is saddening, if not sickening.

Indonesian domestic helpers are humble, cultured, tolerant, sensitive and law abiding in their own country. One such decent woman had allegedly committed a murder in a foreign country. This itself is beyond comprehension. She went to Saudi Arabia in search of a few rials that could provide a reasonable livelihood upon her return. When she left Indonesia, she didn't know the woman whom she killed, assuming she actually killed her. What must have happened during this period to lead to a murder?

If there are strict punishments in Saudi Arabia, there must be very good defense laws as well. Assuming there are, several questions arise, such as who were Soleha's defense lawyers? Who were her physicians and her psychiatrists? What was her state of body and mind before and after committing the crime, assuming that she committed the crime? In which language did her physician, her psychiatrist and her defense lawyer communicate with her? Assuming that these professionals did not know Bahasa Indonesia and also assuming that Soleha's understanding of the language of the land was not adequate, who were the interpreters? Who were the witnesses? If there were not any, on what circumstantial evidence was the case decided? Did somebody explain to her what defense was available to her? In case of a benefit of doubt, was it extended to her?

In the U.S., the "burning bed" is a valid defense for killing. When a spouse has been battered long enough, juries in several cases have decided that killing the abusive spouse was justified as a form of self-defense. This self-defense is available even at a time of relative calm, such as at a time when the abusive spouse is asleep. Defense laws throughout the world enable courts to recognize the usual legal standard of self-defense and acquit a person who has killed when he or she was in imminent danger of being killed.

There may be similar self-defense laws in Saudi Arabia as well -- albeit possibly not as liberal as those in the U.S. Were defenses fully explored to suit the probable facts? Was there a defense made from the possibility that the other woman had happened upon Soleha doing something wrong, and Soleha panicked and killed her (in which case it was not a first degree murder)? Maybe a member of the Saudi woman's own family killed her and to cover their tracks framed Soleha to escape from the law.

The world seems to sympathize with murderers, rapists, embezzlers, extortionists, terrorists, child abusers and child killers -- even when their crimes were proven beyond any doubt -- if they are faced with capital punishment. Soleha never belonged to this category and deserved mercy. Even if Soleha were guilty, was there any investigation into the possibility that the family might have driven Soleha insane?

In courts, mistakes can be made, however infrequent they may be. Interpretation of the same laws differs from jury to jury and from court to court. Many times, a higher court overturns the judgment of a lower court. Was Soleha given a chance to appeal to a higher court, especially since her sentence was to take away her most precious possession, her own life?

All human rights activists throughout the world should address this issue, not only in the judicial arena but also in the legislative arena.

I share the sorrow of Soleha's family and pray to God almighty to rest her soul in peace.

D. PRABHAKAR

Jakarta