A death of princess (Misha'al bint Fahd al Saud) - Research Paper Example

? A DEATH OF PRINCESS (MISHA'AL BINT FAHD AL SAUD) A DEATH OF PRINCESS (Misha'al bint Fahd al Saud) Introduction Variety has been said to be the spice of life. Indeed, cultural diversity is part of this phenomenon that spices up life. This is because in different locations of the world, there are different cultural practices that distinguish the different people of this world, one from the other. There is no denying the fact that one major reason for which people would want to travel from one place to the other is to have a feel of the diversity in culture that exits in different parts of the world. But as much as cultural differences give different people of this world unique identities and personalities, there are cases that some cultural practices practiced in certain places of the world have come up for very sharp global and universal debate and discussion (Brown, 2008). Such debates and discussions are most common about cultural practices that touch on themes of gender, class, race, and ability. In this essay, there is critical review of the case of Misha’al bint Fahd al Saud from a cultural and religious perspective, while discussing how various forms of privilege become evident in her story. This is done with the use of the docu-drama story of “Death of a Princess”, which gives a secondary account of the execution of the princess on the accusation of adultery. The essay shall be addressed from an argumentative perspective, seeking to weigh all sides of prevailing issues as gender, class, race, ability, the reaction of the media, use of privilege. A conclusion shall then be drawn on the side or opinion held by the writer on both sides of the arguments to either justify or condemn various acts that took place. Interlocking themes of social justice Gender During the setting of the event, which was in the 1970s, issues of gender discrimination and gender suppression, especially against the female gender had gone on against most Islamic nations and for that matter, Saudi Arabia. The commonest forms of discrimination and suppression that females suffered are recorded to include in issues of education and selection of a life partner (Smillie, 2009). Some secondary sources have actually debated that the fact that Princess Misha’al bint Fahd al Saud had her education in Lebanon could be attributable to the opposition that she could have faced if she took her education in Saudi Arabia (LittleJohn and Foss, 2008). Argumentatively however, the question of justification in some of these practices that are considered as abuse of the personality of the female gender has been raised in other debates. For example the preservation of chastity and the impact that it has on the moral fiber of the people has been raised. It would be noted that even though education was not totally absent, there were laws that forbad the education of boys and girls in the same classroom setting. Such practices have been said to champion the quest to minimize the natural and biological bond that exists between males and females, especially when they become adolescents. This debate notwithstanding, there is another school of thought that believes that gender related laws in Saudi Arabia is biased against females and this is where the problem is. For the princess, it has been argued that her freedom to make choices of whom she wanted to be with was greatly abused when the royal family attempted to impose a man on her. Class Throughout primary and secondary sources for the story of Pincess Misha’al bint Fahd, the issue of class and how it was used have been questioned and debated. First and foremost, there are researchers who hold the opinion that the king’s action might not have gotten to the extent it did if the Princess was from any ordinary family, and for that matter, a low class family (Jacobsen, 2008). This is because according to such reviewers, the princess’s grandfather, who ordered her execution, took particular interest in the case following the level of shame and disgrace he perceived the conduct of Misha’al bint Fahd al Saud had brought to the royal family. But for her status in Saudi Arabia therefore, she might not have been made to go through what she suffered, particularly as the four male adult witnesses expected in law were not found to raise an issue against her. There are however other writers who hold the opinion that the singular act of the grandfather to have forgone the royal status of the lady and caused her to be blindfolded and knelt for execution represents an act of fairness and unbiased on the part of the elite class of Saudi Arabia at the time. In effect, they opine that the class of the princess was a necessary catalyst in exhibiting fairness and equality before the Sharia law, which was used to find her guilty of adultery (Brown, 2008). All in all, there is a third argument as to why the princess was not executed in public as all other people. In this, the implication that is drawn is that the action of the royal family cannot be judged as being wholly unbiased because it constituted acts of favoritism. Racial and Tribal Injustice In the early 1980s when knowledge of the story surrounding the princess started springing up in America and Britain, a very common topical issue of social justice that came up was the issue of race and racial discrimination that existed in parts of the world. This is because many were those who had started justifying acts of racial discriminations that were recorded in the media in most of parts of multi-cultural settings. The general argument was that if people who are of the same racial background could make laws that vindicated their own actions and reigned some of them to the level of death existed then it was no surprising that people of different colors and racial backgrounds would rise against themselves (Beck, 2006). There were also questions of justification that any Saudi Arabian had to demand equal rights from a land that they traveled, of which they were of different race. But in the midst of all these arguments, an important line of reasoning that must be considered is whether two wrongs make a right; or whether some wrongs could be justified because they had their worse forms performed in other places. In the primary report of how the execution of the princess came about, it has generally been argued that even though Khaled al-Sha'er Mulhallal, the lover of the princess was of Saudi Arabian decent and for that matter the nephew of Ali Hassan al-Shaer who was the Saudi ambassador in Lebanon, both were not from the same tribe and this led to greater hatred of the royal family for the affair that existed between the two. Exercise of one’s ability In a very typical secondary report of the “Death of a Princess”, one may sum the events up as being that Princess Mish’al bint Fahd al Saud found love but she was not allowed to practice her love affair because a greater order, which was the Sharia law, forbad her from doing so. In this regard, analysts are quick to ask the question of when one has the ability to exercise a feeling under the ordinance of law. The legitimacy of this question becomes especially prudent when one act that is considered wrong and criminal in one setting may be deemed as part of normal social life in another setting. But with specific emphasis on the princess, it is important to draw a line in the debating process. One of these lines to draw is the fact that secondary report, especially from the docu-drama made on her has it that the man she met in Lebanon was her first love. This means that she had not been married before going to Lebanon to study. With this point made, the question of her ability to decide on what is best for comes into the question critically. Clearly, she was not given any such social right to follow what her heart felt was good for her because it was a second relationship, which she did not honor rather that she was accused against. The second line to draw also is that while moving to Lebanon, the princess was aware of her royal status and the implication it had on her choice of partner. From this argument, it can be said that the princess refused to exercise her abilities rightly and this was the result of what she suffered. How various forms of privilege become evident in the story Indeed the story presents various forms of privileges and how they became evident in time of events, as well the consequences that emanated from the exhibition of these privileges. The first of such form of privilege that is evident in the story is the privilege for the princess to have selected a place of her choice, where she would be schooled. Some debators have actually said that it is important to ask the question of whether the educational privilege she had over other Saudi girls would have been an issue for discussion if her tragic ending story had not come up. This means that the fact that it was out of her education in Lebanon that the affair that landed her in execution came about means that she did not use her privilege in a more profitable manner. Another form of privilege, and perhaps the most questioned was the attempt made by the royal family to silently end the relationship between the princess and Khaled al-Sha'er Mulhallal so that she would have avoided the execution, which eventually took place because she refused the offer. Even though it is common knowledge that the absence of witnesses against her was a strong way to save her life if she did not make any pronouncements in court of her guilt, it remains a question of whether other people would have had the kind of undercover that she had from the royal family. Crime that happen and how the media represent it Even though the event in question took place in 1977, media attention was drawn in the early 1980s with the making of the docu-drama, “Death of a Princess” by South-African born producer Anthony Thomas. Once the film was made, two major forms of media representations were seen. The first was the British media, which forwent all the pressure it received from Saudi Arabia and other Islamic communities and aired the film in its airwaves. The second was the American media that refused to air the film even though it had earlier advertised airing it because it succumb to talks of diplomacies with the Saudi authority. Indeed, there are those who both praise and condemn the British media and the American media alike. Generally though, the issue has become of public media interest today as forms of media advancement such as the internet makes it virtually impossible to hide issues of this nature. But judging from the role of the media in society as an agency that is responsible for educating, entertaining and informing the public, it can be said that the mere fact that a media house decides to either air the film or not cannot become a valid grounds to judge that media house. Rather, a holistic approach should be taken on how critical said media houses have been with the analysis of the entire series of issues that came up (Jacobsen, 2008). From this perspective, it can be argued that the media has really played its role well in ensuring some cultural practices that take place in the world over have gained international recognition. Through this, those that deserve condemnation have duly being condemned. Conclusion Serious interesting debates and arguments have been laid on various thematic aspects of “Death of a Princess”. Based on the arguments made, there are a number of conclusions and stance that the writer can take on the series of events that took place. In the first place, it will be concluded that as much as the dynamism in culture and religious differences give a spice to life, it is equally important that the fundamental human rights of people be matched up with these cultural practices at all times. This is to say that fundamental human rights is supreme and must always come ahead of any cultural and religious interests and believes. This conclusion is made against the backdrop that the fundamental human rights of people have a universal code that binds all people and transcends all cultural interests (Beck, 2006). Clearly, no one has the power to define for the special people of Saudi Arabia, which offences in their land should constitute criminal transgressions and which of them should be considered as civil offences. But as much as the fundamental human rights of people, including the tragic princess protect their rights to life, a fair trial that allowed her to make her case would have been a rather justified way of exercising the laws of the land. Indeed, there are serious questions of the use of power and personal authority, especially when the question of the interest of the King in getting the princess to marry a man of his choice comes in. One may be justified to conclude that but for the personal interest of the King, the princess would have received a fairer trail. Cited Works Beck, Ulrich. Power in the Global Age. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. 2006. Print. Brown, L. David. Creating Credibility: Legitimacy and Accountability for Transnational Civil Society. Bloomfield, Conn. : Kumarian Press. 2008. Print. Jacobsen, Andrew. Human rights monitoring: Field mission manual, Leiden: Martinus-Nijhoff Publishers. 2008. Print. Little, John, S. and Foss, Kwame. Theories of human communication, Belmont: Thomas Wandsworth. 2008. Print. Smillie, Ian. Freedom from Want: The Remarkable Success Story of BRAC: The Global Grassroots Organization that’s Winning the Fight against Poverty. Bloomfield, Conn.: Kumarian Press. 2009. Print. Read More