إرسال موضوع جديد الرد على الموضوع  [ 31 مشاركة ]  الانتقال إلى صفحة السابق  1, 2, 3  التالي
نسخة للطباعة
الكاتب رسالة
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الجمعة إبريل 08, 2005 8:58 am 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء فبراير 01, 2005 11:50 pm
مشاركات: 619
مكان: اليمن
غير متصل
A Statement by the Joint Meeting Parties


The Joint Meeting Parties have followed the foolish behavior and actions conducted by the security forces on Sunday, 27th of February 2005 against the protestors who were in front of the penal court. The court was holding its special session trialing a number of scholars and journalists convicted with accusation related to freedom of opinion and expression. This actions peaked when Mr. Ali Al Dailami, a member of the general secretary of the Union of Popular Forces, 11 of his protesting colleagues were arrested.

The Joint Meeting Parties strongly condemn these actions which contradicts with the minimal conditions and principles of the current available democratic margin. This margin which is constantly narrowed by the government. The joint Meeting Parties demands the prompt release of Mr. Ali Al Dailami and his colleagues. In addition, it emphasizes on the dangerous consequences of the series of violations to freedoms and political rights granted by the constitution.

It particularly warns from the dangerous impact of the political congestion that is growing increasingly. This confirms the correct vision of the Joint Meeting Parties which appreciates the need for urgent steps towards political reform, which is considered the ideal means to get the nation out from the dark era it is living in today, and to liberate the community from corruption and injustice which its suffers. Political reform will also limit the intended political and social instability and shall prevent impending political crisis.

The Joint Meeting Parties

The Yemeni Congregation for Reform- Islah Party
Yemeni Socialist Party
The People’s Nasserite Unionist party
The National Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party
The Haqq Party
The Union of Popular Forces

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الجمعة إبريل 08, 2005 9:04 am 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء فبراير 01, 2005 11:50 pm
مشاركات: 619
مكان: اليمن
غير متصل
Withdrawal Statement by the Defense Committee of Scholar Al Dailami and Scholar Miftah.

The defense committee of scholars Yahya Hussein Al Dailami and Mohammed Ahmed Miftah accused before the specialized primary penal court formed of lawyers; Abdulaziz Al Baghdadi. Ahmed Ali Al Wada’i, Dr. Mohamemd Al Mikhlafi, Nabeela Al Mofti, Jamal AL Goa’bi, Mohammed Ali Al Maqtari, Mohammed Hussein Luqman, Ahmed Qassim Al Dailami, and Abdulrab Al Murtatha, decided to withdraw from the court session held on Sunday 30/1/2005 upon the reveal of the true pathway un which the trial is progressing. To make them clear for the public, human rights organizations, public organizations, lawyers syndicate, and the media, hereby are the reasons and motivations behind the withdrawal of the defense committee:

I. Violations against the Defendants:

1. Defendants were subjected to brutal violations against their constitutional and legal rights in very intimidating and humiliating means since their discrete kidnapping by the political security forces. These violations were practiced with unbelievably indifferent manner and unfortunately continue before the primary court, which is the house of “justice”, one of Allah Almighty’s holy names.

In 9/9/04, defendant scholar Yahya Al Dailami was kidnapped while exiting the mosque after his morning prayers by the political security forces and was hid for 10 days with out informing his family. It was not allowed for him to meet any visitors for 2 weeks.

In 16/9/2004, scholar Mohammed Ahmed Miftah was kidnapped at 10:00 pm in front of his house in Al Rawtha and was hid for 2 weeks. He was not allowed to meet any one for 2 months.

2. The remaining books that were kept in a store next to scholar Miftah’s residence were taken away. Some of these books are valuable and worth more than 15 million Rials. We do not know what is the destiny of these books even though several inquires were made in this regards by the prosecution.
3. The prosecutors hurried to present their accusation decrees giving no time for the defense committee for defense.
4. We had hope that court will be impartial enough to guarantee the constitutional and legal rights of the defendants, so we presented two essential demands for defense to the court in its second session:
- Release of the defendants as they have been arrested according to no legal warrant being a violation of the constitution and law.
- Provision of copies of case-files to be able to perform the tasks of defense according to the content of the files.

The former head of court responded to our request for a copy of the case-file, and rejected the second demand of release of the defendants. This was 3 days before the judiciary action in the court session held in 26/12/04. The period following the judiciary act, the court general secretary refused to provide a copy of the case-files according to its unpublicized instructions.

5. Before the new head of court in the 9/1/05 session, the head of court totally refused the previous permission of copying the case-files. After so much argument with the defense, he permitted providing a copy of the accusation statement, and the list of proof evidence only, as well as the opportunity to appeal to court. When the appeal request was presented, the head of the appeal court declared that copying the file was previously rejected by court. In the session held in 30/1/05, the defense committee requested the permission to present defense based on ignorance of accusations, which was rejected by the prosecutors, the court denied all the defense requests including provision of a file copy, release of defendants, or suspending the trial until the requests for obtaining a copy of the files are dealt with as well as presenting formal defense requests based on ignorance of accusations. The defense committee was saddened when the list of proof evidence was declared. Only then, the defense committee decided to withdraw from court after registering t in the court minutes to save the honor of the profession as partners with the jury to establish justice.

II. Justification of Withdrawal:

Upon its decision to withdraw from trial, the defense committee of the defendants scholars Miftah and Al Dailami, advocates for constitutional legislations, and the international conventions which all conform with the Islamic teachings and legislations. Articles (47, 48,and 49) of the constitution concerning the defendant rights, articles (7,9,10,11,and 12) of the International Declaration of Human Rights, articles (7,9.10, 14,15, and 17) of the International Convention for Civil and Political Rights ratified by Republic of Yemen, articles ( 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,324, 325,346/2,5, 396, and 397) of the Penal Law, articles ( 16, and 64) of the Trail Law, and article (5) of the Attorney’s Law. All these articles consider the right to defense the core of the legality of any trial, with which honesty and integrity of trails can be guaranteed.

As the defense committee regards that the procedures of the trial is not assisting it to perform its tasks and being not able to obtain a copy of the case files, it believes that it has been limited and paralyzed denying the defendants their right to a fair trial before their judge and transferring them to a special court, which presents a fake role for the defense in a trial that has been planned for previously.

The defense committee is astonished that the American Justice has provided the Yemeni citizen Mohammed Al Moayad and his companion, guarantees for a fair trial starting with giving him the choice for an attorney and providing a true copy of the files and voice recorded evidence stamped and accredited by court, and provided the Palestinian struggler Marwan Al Barghothi the right to practice his political activity inside the Israeli prison.

The decision of withdrawal by the defense committee is a continuation of in the right direction which has been adopted by the attorneys syndicate, Sana’a Branch in 3/8/2004, when it supported the withdrawal of 12 attorneys whom were assigned by the syndicate to defend the persons accused for the explosion of the French tank Limburg, because the same court denied the defense the right to obtain a copy of the case file and subjected them to practices that underestimated their integrity, as in the case of scholars Al Dailami and Miftah.

Therefore, the defense committee calls all the colleague attorneys to stand in solidarity with in the face of the practices in the specialized penal court which violates the constitution and national and international law, and boycotting the sessions of all trials in this court.

The defense committee quotes the Minister of Human Rights saying” when the channels for advocacy are narrowed, and means to the truth are blocked, and the legality of defending human rights is questioned, the opportunities for achieving justice become limited, and a substantial alteration will affect the relative values of people’s rights and duties…with out your assistance- you human right defenders- justice can be misled and people’s rights can be blown with the wind”. The defense committee calls the Minister of Human Rights to intervene with the supreme authorities in the country.

It also demands from all activists in the field of human rights and civil society organizations including parties, syndicates and activists to mobilize inside the official authorities in the state to stop the practices of prejudice. It confirms that what is subjected to scholars Al dailami and Miftah is a brutal violation of their civil rights not based on any solid ground. The direction towards the trial is heading is very dangerous which is trial based on suspicion, and taking political advantage of judiciary power. The defense committee demands from everyone to request the publication of the contents of the case file in the newspapers to be monitored by the community conforming to the heart of the publicity of any trial. This will prove the accountability of what was mentioned by the defense committee.

Stated in Sana’a, Monday 31/1/05
Defense Committee of Scholar Al Dailami and Scholar Miftah.

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الجمعة إبريل 08, 2005 10:09 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء فبراير 01, 2005 11:50 pm
مشاركات: 619
مكان: اليمن
غير متصل
Detailed Complaint presented to Her Excellency, Ms. Amat Al Aleem Al Soswa, Minister of Human Rights by relatives of Scholar Yahya Huseein Al Dailami for all the crimes and violations of rights and freedoms that he has been subjected to.

Your Excellency , Ms. Amat Al Aleem Al Soswa, Minister of Human Rights,

We hereby summarize to you the crimes and violations as follows:

1- In the very early morning of 9/9/2004, while scholar Yahya Hussein Al Dailami was going out of the Folaihi Mosque where he gives his regular religion classes, an armed group of people kidnapped hi m to an unknown place with out any legal or judiciary warranty. This is a major violation of human rights stated in the universal declaration of human rights and a violation of article 48 of the constitution as well as a violation of accessed legal penal procedures concerning arrest according to article 246 of the penal law and illegal arrest in article 48 (e) of the constitution.
2- He was deprived his right to contact his family or relatives and he was not informed with the charge against him violating article 73,77 of procedure law and article 48 (d) of the constitution.
3- After 10 days of follow up by his relatives it was discovered that he was kept in one of the political security prisons (in a solitary cell) violating his rights granted by the constitution article 48 (a,b) and article 6 and 7 of the penal procedure law
4- He was detained for more than a month with out any charge violating article 48 (c ) of constitution and article 76 of the procedure law . These are very strong violations based on the constitution.
5- The big disaster was when we knew by coincidence that 10/2004 that the prosecution is conduction the same violations as follows:

- The prosecution received the security file from the political security which included what is obviously attempts to deprive scholar Yahya AL Dailami from his human rights and his freedom of belief.
- Although it was obvious that all the security file was unauthentic as it was based on illegal actions including illegal arrest and violations of legal and human rights as well as utilization of force and terrorizing to obtain information or statements.. the prosecution should have released the defendant immediately upon finding out how fake the charge was based on article 13 of penal procedure law.
- There should have been an investigation with all this who participated in or incited the commitment of those crimes and violations ad presenting them to court based on article 48 (e) of the constitution and articles 166, 167, 168. 246 of the Crime and penal Law.
- Failure of prosecution to perform its role is considered a crime in article 165 of the crime and penal law .
- Above all this, the prosecution office insisted on detaining and isolating scholar Al Dailami without informing his with his charge or granting him right to defense . This included also inhuman and indecent way of treatment violating article 49 of the constitution and procedure law. The prosecutors did not allow him to contact any of his relatives or contact his lawyer and started investigation in 13/10/2004 discretely and when inquired about in the penal persecution, we received information that there was no case file for scholar Yahya Al Dailami.
- We gathered that there is persistent injustice when we discovered that he has been interrogated in another location, next to the political security office claimed to be a prosecution office. We observed that it was only a security office with many armed forces where into all lawyers and related personnel to the judicial case were not allowed.
- The prosecution prevented lawyer Abdul Aziz Al Baghdadi from attending the interrogation even though we have confirmed with the prosecution official that the lawyer was prepsent per scholar Al Dailami’s request justifying that by promising to allow Mr. Ahmed Qassem Al Dailami who was not present at that moment which is considered a violation to article 181. The lawyer should have been allowed in as a judiciary aid if not per request of himself and his family.
- The prosecutors insisted on not allowing Mr. Al Baghdadi to defend the scholar and delaying the scholar’s lawyer Mr. Ahmed Al Dailami who was allowed in after one hour of waiting. Mr. Ahmed Al Dailami, realized by him self how unfair and unjust the procedures were , and that starting investigation with out providing the defendant with adequate defense was a major violation of the defendant’s rights per articles 177, 125, 9,8 of the penal procedure law in addition to articles mentioned above.
- Above all this, charges and crimes were addressed to Mr. Al Dailami without giving an opportunity to the lawyer to make a copy of the case file and defend the scholar since the prosecution and arrest procedures were all illegal and based on no clear charge and the scholar was forced to provide information and statement which is a crime according to article 166 of the crime and penal law.
- Scholar Al Dailami was treated in the most inhuman way since he is transported via a Box police car that is 80 cm high and has no way for light or air, and is not adequate even to transport animals. The lawyer saw the scholar handcuffed and his head covered with a plastic bag which is a violation to law.
- The defense committee believes that there is no use from its presence since there is no respect or reaction to its demands as well as no respect to the human rights and freedoms of scholar Al Dailmai. When we, his relatives, attempted to visit him on 21/10/2004 we were informed that only two of his brothers can visit him and when they got to the hall way, the scholar was requested to answer the phone while his two brothers were physically attacked and were kicked out of the building. He was prevented from visits by his relatives and friends depriving him from his rights according to article 30 of prison law….what is the case when this person subjected to all this is a prisoner of opinion?
- All the above mentioned events is a violation to the Universal Declaration of Human rights and the International Convention of Civil and political rights of 1966.
- We specify the following articles of the Universal Declaration:
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 11.
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
From all this it is clear that Scholar/ Yahya Al Dailami has committed no crime but expressing his opinions and practicing his Zaidi Islamic sect teachings.

We hereby demand the following from your Excellency through applying articles of the law and constitution:

- Immediate release of our relative scholar Yahya Al Dailami.
- Following up and working on prosecution of all persons who committed or incited these violations and illegal actions.

We trust your ability to apply justice and protecting rights and freedoms of people.

Sincerely,

Relatives of Scholar yahya Huseein Al Dalami
Represented by:
His brother/ Ali Hussein AL Dailami.

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يونيو 21, 2005 2:03 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: السبت مارس 19, 2005 9:03 pm
مشاركات: 1041
غير متصل
Declaration of the united in solidarity With Scholars Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy and Mohamed Muftah


We, the united in solidarity with scholars Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy and Mohamed Muftah, were astonished by the verdicts issued against them on Sunday 19th Rabee Al-Thani- 29/6/2005. The verdicts were death penalty for scholar Yahay Hussain Al-Dailmy, and 8 years jail for Mohamed Muftah. They were issued by what is called " Sana'a Specialized Penalty Court". Such verdicts were not expected despite the nature of the authority that issued the verdicts like the purpose of forming that court, the circumstances of scholars Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy and Mohamed Muftah, and the series of inhuman practices and violations against the scholars' rights and freedom starting from:-

1- The violation of arresting the two scholars without legal ground or previous notice on September, locking them in unknown places and hiding them from their families, isolating them and not allowing them to meet or contact their lawyers, not acknowledging them with the reasons of all they were facing. Their lock up continued without legal ground and without transferring them to judicial authority until mid November 2004. All that is considered violation of items No (17, 9, 7) of the international treaty and political and civil rights, and items (12,9) of the international declaration of Human rights.
2- After they were transferred to the prosecution authority, the situation did not change. The prosecution did not act as expected in such breach and violation against the scholars' rights and freedom, even though their family presented complaints to the attorney general's office demanding justice and punishment for those who committed the violations against them. That is considered a violation of the prosecution's work obligation and law and constitution provisions. It is also considered violation of items No ( 17,2) of the international political and civil rights, items No (8,7) of international declaration of human rights, and against items No (12,13,14,16) of the provisions of the united nations concerning the instructional principles of the prosecution members. The prosecution didn't provide any of the international standards in the procedures it took against the scholars. It didn't give them any chance to defend themselves. No confrontation was made, and it purposely dodged and ignored the defense.
3- The prosecution presented illegal bill of indictment regarding the claims against the scholars. The items which the prosecution attributed the bill of indictment to do not incriminate the scholars. That bill of indictment is considered a plane violation of human rights and fundamental freedom in all treaties and international agreements especially political treaties such as political and civil rights, international declaration of human rights, and the declaration of defenders of human rights.
Those allegations were like unknown puzzles, because no actions were clarified, nor allegations facts and other physical evidences with the rest of the evidence as stated in penal procedures law. The prosecution in their case relied on results of offenses and violations of human rights and basic freedom stated in article (1) and on plundered things through breaking and entry to their homes without legal warrant in which is against the Yemeni law and constitution. That is also considered offense to their private lives and the lives of the rest of their families under force of arm. We considered them fabricated evidence. Besides, the scholars' families have filed to the general prosecution complaints about the fabrication and distortion that happened.

4- The prosecution presented its bill of indictment before exceptional court called "Specialized Penalty Court" which its foundation was a breach of the constitution and law, because it is exceptional court and new version of state security's courts. Yemeni constitution as well as law totally prohibits forming such courts whatever the name is. In addition to that, the taken procedures and the issued verdict clearly confirm that there is no doubt about the EXCEPTIONAL quality for such courts. Since these kinds of courts lack legitimacy, it is natural that its verdicts are illegal. Such courts are known for practicing with violation of defense principles, litigations guarantee. The least international criterions of judicial were not obtainable.
5- One of the facts attributed to them in the bill of indictment is something that is an essence of human rights and basic freedom guaranteed by international agreements, that is the right to assemble and form societies, the right to consolidate rights, freedom and acquire and exchange information about them, which ensures its protection and spreading. Also one of thing that were on the list of indictment was the right to work to protect those right and taking stands, which ensure stopping the violation in the frame of law( like stay-in strike to stop the violation of human rights in life and personal security that was happening in Sa'ada). That strike was more like a human and legal obligation according to the announcement of protecting the human rights defenders in the least amount of opinion expression which is considered a breach of all international treaties specially. They are the ones stated in item No (14) of the international treaty, item No (10) of the world announcement for human rights and against the items of United Nation's principles concerning independence of judicial system.
6- The trail was unfair and did not comply with the minimum worldly standards. The court divested the scholars from constitutionally and legally ensured means of defense. The scholars were not informed with the allegations against them in details, no facilities were presented to the defense, instead the defense side were hindered, and the defense lawyers were cornered. They were not even able to apply the basic requirements to ensure the necessary obligations in defending according to the nature of their job and law, as that judicial authority refused to provide them even with copy of the papers. The court stayed hesitated the whole trail to approve that request which made the defense side walk out of the case since it presence made no difference and does not serve justice. Instead, their presence made the trail legal although it lacked the simplest defense rights that were ensured in civilized laws, especially in the Yemeni constitution and world announcement of human rights etc.
7- That Judicial authority followed one side in the trail, that is the prosecution side without the presence of neither the defense side, nor the scholars themselves, because they refused the illegal and inhuman practices against them, and because they did not have any chance to defend themselves. Their request to postpone the trail until they appoint defense lawyers of their choice to attend was denied. Then defense lawyer was appointed for them by the court not by them. He was imposed on them despite their protest that reached hunger strike. That led them to be tortured by locking them in a place for inhuman usage, prohibiting them of visitation right or allowing them to meet any one of their family or friends. They even arrested members of their families and did not release them until they wrote statement promising not to attend the trail sessions. These kinds of actions are against the principle of overtness, and against constitution provisions, law, item No (14) of the international treaty of political and civil rights and against the above-mentioned items. The situation reached to the extent of assaulting the solidarity crowd through swearwords, arrests, shooting fire to scare them away, and prohibiting them from attending the trail sessions. The thing that is disapproved the most of the court that issued the verdict and is considered a proof of nullity of the procedures was the deposition of Mr. Al-Azani, and not paying attention to the defenses he presented, all this is conclusive evidence that the verdicts were only on one side, because there is no rule of the defense side. The court issued the verdict in a condition of resentment for the scholars clung to their rights of freedom of defense and refused the artificial rule imposed on them by the court. Therefore, those verdicts were as a reaction to their stands, which clearly shows that the court was not neutral.
8- The two scholars issued an announcement and turned a copy to the court who included it in its record. The announcement stated complaints of the assaults and violation against them and their families. It also stated that those violations against them were registered on papers with that authority, and that the refusal of that authority was based on the imposition of the prosecution not to enable them of their rights specially their right to have a copy of those papers. Those procedures were made so the violations won't be exposed, nor what their announcement included of violations of the principles and necessary standards of judicial system and judiciary in the action of the judicial authority. All that proves that they are assigned and the verdict was already decided.
9- We came up to those facts through our follow up and field examinations of the case as defenders of human rights, we see that it is our obligation , and in despondence to the human call for aid by the two scholars through hunger striking and the issued statements of their families and the sitter-in solidarity, we address this announcement to the Yemeni public opinion to acknowledge them about the scary facts concealed behind the unfair results the awful verdict have reached to against the two scholars, the Yemeni judicial system and the Yemeni and human society as a whole. We address this announcement to the outer public opinion specially to the authorities, local, regional and international organizations of human rights. We hope that this case will be paid attention to for the implications of clear violations of human rights in it. And that soon an action will be taken to release the two scholars who are prisoners of opinion. We wish that the necessary arrangements will be taken to investigate with all the people who committed those violation and to give fair compensate to the scholars families the damages they suffered from.

التوقيع
عندما نصل إلى مرحلة الفناء على المنهج القويم ، أعتقد أنا قد وصلنا إلى خير عظيم .
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يونيو 21, 2005 2:03 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: السبت مارس 19, 2005 9:03 pm
مشاركات: 1041
غير متصل
Alshoura newspaper / 1 June , 2005

Yahya Al-Dailimi, Imam of Al-Mahdi Dome’s Mosque:

We’re not against pluralism, democracy and we don’t accuse anyone of infidelity



○○ Religious preacher Yahya Hussein Al-Dailami studied in Yemen since primary school until he ultimately obtained two Bachelor’s degrees in both Arabic language and Islamic studies from the Sana’a University. He is a disciple of prominent Yemeni religious leaders, including the late Yemen’s Mufti [religious authority] Ahmed Mohammed Zabarah, Mohammed Mohammed Ismael Al-Mansour, Majd al-Deen bin Al-Hussein Al-Mo’ayadi, Hamoud bin Abbas Al-Mo’ayad, as well as the mufti Mohammed bin Ahmed Al-Jirafi and the deceased Yahya bin Mohammed bin Yahya Al-Dailami, and others.

At the personal level, he is married with six children and lives with his family in a rented house (of YR5000/month) in the Old City of Sana’a.

Recently, a verdict was issued by the respective court inflicting punishment measures against Al-Dailami and Miftah [another young religious preacher]. This measure eliminated any hope that the regime would return to sanity and breached all principles related to freedom, justice and independence of the judiciary. A proof of this was the unjustifiable imposition of the death sentence on Al-Dailami.

To this effect, Al-Shoura weekly interviewed Mr. Al-Dailami upon issuance of the verdict which was unanimously regarded as a clear intimidation to all opinion makers.

● First of all, why the death sentence?

◙ I am trying to find a reasonable and legal justification for this abusive measure! I wasn’t involved in murder or corruption, nor have I rebelled against the state. All my crime is that I exercised my right to freedom of expression and have lobbied against the war in Sada’a. I called for a halt to this war and a resort to wisdom and dialogue. I argued that deaths, among both soldiers and civilians, are a loss for Yemen as a whole, and no one can claim victory in such a war.

To me, this war has to do, partially at least, with sectarian profiling, particularly those who are affiliated with the Zaydi school of thought. In this type of war, free intellectual thinking is threatened, thus breaking social peace and harmony. In my opinion, once this war in Sada’a is over, the regime will identify new targets from this school of thought, the descendents of the Hashimate family and anyone who stands in their solidarity. Accusations will be hammered against them of affiliation with the so-called “Houthism” or “Faithful Youth”. I believe silence pertaining to this injustice is a contributing factor that reinforces the official position of the Government on the ongoing war instead of encouraging dialogue. This enforces the use of force over wisdom.

I find in this war a campaign of arrests, provocation and special targeting of people, all of which are practices that are not in line with the principles of justice, unity and free thinking. Inherent in this kind of thinking are the freedom of ijtiahd [religious reasoning] and the freedom of thinking for all people, be they scientists, preachers or entrepreneurs in all walks of life. People reserve the right to reject oppression and tyranny, as they were born free and should only submit their lives to Allah alone without any association to it.

I believe that the death sentence was meant to be a message to all free opinion makers from all segments of the society and all schools of thought. I spoke to my brothers about the address of the attorney—“the intelligent agent”—who was appointed by the judge—“the general”—in which he called for the death sentence during his last hearing. This proves that he was acting as “staff sergeant” for the political security and not as an attorney. It also indicates that the trial was only a means to reach political decrees disguised behind some judicial pretext.

● Are you accused of provocation?

◙ I have not provoked any social disorder. I have only expressed an opinion which is legitimate under political rights. I hope you would not omit anything from my reply like what the political security did when they omitted, fabricated and changed my words, and finally blinded my eyes and got me to sign on things I don’t know about. The provocation is what comes before the incident not after!

During demonstrations and speeches, I urged and pushed their Excellencies, majesties and heinous, the kings, presidents and emirs of the Arab world to join their forces against the Zionist attack on Arabs and Muslims.

I also urged the Arabs and Muslims to stand hand-in-hand in confronting Arab submission to Zionism, rejecting the sense of submissiveness, and boycotting all what is American or Zionist, whether in polity, industry or culture. Religious leaders were blamed for not engaging in political life. Therefore, I believed I was doing my part in raising awareness and advising from my sacred platform, here in the mosque, which does not accept abuse, deception and conspiracy. We are not moved by any political aspirations or personal interests. I love unity, peace, safety and well being for all people. I think that the country needs comprehensive reforms, and that people need independent judiciary, judges with conscience, and a political will that respects the law, protects human rights, and does not tolerate any violations on freedoms or integrity of people. I used to believe, like many others, that by rejecting corruption, refusing to be corrupt and standing against injustices I am helping the President, the regime, Government officials as well as the people to do the right thing. I believed that demonstrations and strikes are peaceful, legitimate and civilized means for expressing one’s opinions against aggressive US and western policies towards the issues of Arabs and Muslims and their sacred places. They are also as legitimate in rejecting violence, terrorism and extreme harshness against people. My responsibility in this regard is educational and advisory. The aim is to bring people together, to advocate for the values of love, peace, sincerity and unity of thought. Unfortunately, all of these values have been twisted to become accusations: to think freely, to be affiliated with a particular school of thought, to be of a particular family descent, to express one’s opinion at mosque sermons, to know and refuse to flatter; all of these have become accusations punishable by death.

● You were accused of spying for Iran. What is the story behind this accusation and what is your relationship with Iran and Hezbollah?

◙ Iran is a country and Hezbollah is a political group in a country, and I am a Yemeni citizen living in Yemen. I have no relationships with Hezbollah or Iran except for a strong sense of admiration for Iran for its stance in solidarity with the Palestinian people and its interest in protecting Islam’s sacred sites. I also admire Iran for its consistent support for Muslims against the Zionist relentless attacks.

I am also an admirer of Hezbollah which has stood against the Israeli occupation and taught the Israelis a lesson that revived the spirit of hope in the lives of Muslims, gave them a true sense of freedom and dignity.


It is by no means a secret that the President of Yemen has officially visited Iran and signed security, economic and cultural agreements with them. This was covered by all public media and witnessed by the world at large. Furthermore, the Irani President has visited Yemen, as well as the Chairman of the Shoura Council of Iran and other senior officials. I have never heard that Iran is a hostile country to Yemen or that traveling to Iran is a criminal act, in and of itself, that deserved the death penalty, except in the political security interrogation’ rooms.

It is also equally known that Yemen, represented by its President, has praised Hezbollah on occasions and public statements to the extent that people almost believed that we would support the cause of Hezbollah both physically and financially.

● The verdict literally founded upon your travel to Iran the evidence of being involved in spying for Iran?

◙ Yes, I did travel to Iran few years ago in response to an official invitation from the host country, handed to me through one of its Embassy’s staff in Yemen, to participate in a conference on Palestine. Yemeni participants to this same conference included: Mr. Abbas Al-Shami, a journalist who works for the General Public Congregation (GPC) party, Mr. Hatim Abu Hatim, the Head of the Public Committee for Resisting Normalization, and myself as a religious representative from Yemen. At the time, the political security had obtained copies of the invitation letters and the visa at departure from Sana’a airport, and there was no mention of the travel being banned or otherwise.

Moreover, I visited the Embassy of Iran in Sana’a to attend their national anniversary in response to an invitation. I attended the official ceremony in the presence of the Mufti of Yemen at the time, the late Ahmed Mohammed Zabarah, as well as a number of religious personalities, university professors, attorneys, politicians and journalists. I participated more than once in such national celebrations, and all were attended by officials and politicians, etc. The Government of Yemen never expressed unrest regarding such participations. I never thought that merely by participating in other countries’ activities, I am becoming subject to accusations of any punishable crimes. What we know is that Iran is a country that is busy with its own affairs, and doesn’t have any interest in damaging Yemen. All of a sudden, we hear the opposite of what we have always thought. If Iran is an enemy, the Government of Yemen should have informed its citizens to take caution. In brief, the accusation of spying is a mere flagrant political conspiracy, and it is too stupid to deserve any elaborate persuasion.

● What about the accusation of provocation for discrimination and sectarianism?

◙ I have always believed that discrimination means creating division on the basis of color, gender or race in terms of treatment, and provision of justice and law. In my case, I have never assumed any position, formulated any law nor written any book that calls for discrimination or sectarianism. I am a strong believer of equality, justice and freedom. I reject any indignation against people or individuals, and hate loftiness, conspiracy, injustice and corruption.

Concerning sectarianism, I believe in the peaceful co-existence of all schools of thought within Muslim societies, because this diversity strengthens knowledge, values, morality and economy of the society. This makes the society safe, stable and free from corruption, injustice, arrogance, exploitation and tyranny. It maintains the coherence of the society, thereby making people clear of mind, clean in heart, with a sound thinking and good image. Such a society is able to benefit itself and its nation, as well as humankind at large.

Allow me here to call upon religious leaders, intellectuals, politicians and all honorable citizens who are committed to their responsibility towards this country to strive with all their strength to prevent any deterioration, bloodshed, corruption or injustice. This country has historically been recognized as a nation of justice, peace, law, equality and solidarity for the rights of weak, poor or vulnerable civilians. I call upon everyone to improve this country and to let people of other countries know that Yemen is indeed a nation of faith, wisdom and knowledge. It has also been home to victims of injustice, as indicated by our beloved Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him).

● What about cleric Hussein Badralddin Al-Houthi?

◙ I met Mr. Hussein Badralddin Al-Houthi only once, and that was in Sana’a when he was elected member of the Parliament before 1997.

● Can we learn more about your abduction and the nature of accusations that were filed against you by the political security during interrogations?

◙ A militant group abducted me while I was leaving Al-Filaihi mosque on Thursday, 9 September 2004, after the Fajir prayer. One of them told me that Ghalib Al-Gamish [of the political security] has instructed that I be arrested. Then, I spent four months in custody at the political security.

They covered my eyes and transported me to a room in which a group of interrogators were awaiting. They informed me of their plans to arrest such religious leaders Mohammed bin Mohammed Al-Mansour and Hamoud bin Abbas Al-Moayad, Dr. Amal Hajar (my wife) as well as other religious personalities and their disciples. Afterwards, they started making up accusations against me.

Firstly, they accused me of acting as a political wing for Hussein Badralddin Al-Houthi. Secondly, they accused me of building relationships with Iran and Hezbollah.

The interrogations used to take place both day and night and last several hours each. I was deeply concerned for other Islamic clerics, for women, and for students who might experience the same terrifying practices as mine at the political security. Nevertheless, I only spoke the truth, thanks to Allah.

Regarding the accusations related to the “political wing” of Hussein Badralddin Al-Houthi and the relationship with Iran and Hezbollah, they did not have anything to support their claim, and they were only trying to make up ones in order to justify their actions. This was evidenced by a number of unjustified accusations and the refusal of the authorities to provide copies of the case to the defense, as they feared it would be shared with the public and the whole lie related to the evidence is disclosed.

The third accusation relates to the establishment of what is called “Sana’a Youth” group which was engaged in organizing demonstrations and lobbying activities. This group—composed of a group of young people from the Old City of Sana’a and surrounding areas—has previously organized demonstrations and activities in solidarity with the Palestinians and in condemnation of the US attacks on Muslim countries particularly the occupation of both Afghanistan and Iraq, etc.

To this effect, several facts need to be clarified. First, the activities of this group have actually been ceased since March 2003. Second, such demonstrations and activities were attended also by high officials from the Government, the Parliament, prominent social figures and others. Third, the “Sana’a Youth” is not an organized congregation in the official sense. They were just a group of young people who came together to express a common opinion exercising their Sharia’a and constitutional rights.

Sana’a Youth is a group of concerned citizens and residents from the Sana’a neighborhoods who felt morally obliged to stand against the unjust US policies and Israeli occupation, to break the unfortunate silence among Arabs and Muslims around the US violations and the arduous Zionist aggressions against the Palestinians and their sacred places. It is rather a public gathering, not a political organization, that found in such demonstrations and activities a simple relief to their burnt hearts and a way to discharge their anger against American and Zionist policies. However, all of these activities have taken place with proper permissions from the Government and with support from the Government, represented by the Mayer of Sana’a and the Mental Guidance of Armed Forces. These public events were also covered by Yemen’s News Agency (SABA), the Yemeni TV and other official and unofficial media. They were all peaceful in nature and no breach of any rules set forth by the law and the constitution was recorded.

● Do you think that there are any personal positions by the President or any other Government officials against you in this case?

◙ To the contrary, I was among those who attended a meeting with the President before being arrested and I personally don’t have any problem with the President or any other official. Even when I would have a different opinion than the official position, I would relate it to the entire regime and not to a person per se. With this being said, I don’t know what the President has in mind, or what has caused his resentment to me. What can I say except in Allah we trust.

● Where is this official targeting campaign going, in your estimation?

◙ I don’t make prophecies. You, like others, are well capable of reading today’s developments. I just wonder to whose sake this all is. Why is corruption not fought against and corrupt people confronted! Why are people arrested, including children and women! Why the war! Why the targeting of certain school of thought, kin or group! Does this serve the principle of equal citizenship and respect for law and constitution! Do the war, the arresting campaigns, the targeting of people and the military trials achieve development and reinforce our national unity! I am an opinion maker, Miftah is another opinion maker and Sharaf Al-Nu’ami is yet another. All of us are Zaydis, with no political affiliations. We are not against political pluralism and democracy. We don’t accuse anyone of infidelity. We condemn violence and extremism. We are Yemeni citizens and part of this nation. The recent developments in Yemen are but a test for the truthfulness, conscience and sincerity of our political and civil forces. It is a test to religious leaders and all free people and their credibility. It is noteworthy that the verdict is but a message to those people to cease thinking freely. I am sure that the death sentence will not achieve development and well being for the Yemeni people, and will not grant the country a certification of full democracy. I also believe that my imprisonment and blood was not among the six goals of the revolution and the Republic. I also know perfectly that the President Ali Abdullah Saleh holds full responsibility according to Sharia’a over my case, and that Allah (swt) will ask him on the Day of Judgment about me, my injustice, my blood, my life, about terrifying my children and my family.

● Any last word?

◙ I love my country, the country that Allah has praised in the Holy Qur’an, as well as the beloved Prophet (pbuh) in 120 of his narrated traditions.

Yemen is in my heart and mind. I love for it prosperity, success and happiness; to become a country of strength and coherence; a free and honest nation, rich with scientists, clerics, artists, writers and talented people in all walks of life. I ask Allah to protect Yemen from all calamities, tyranny, corruption and occupation, amen.

التوقيع
عندما نصل إلى مرحلة الفناء على المنهج القويم ، أعتقد أنا قد وصلنا إلى خير عظيم .
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يونيو 21, 2005 2:04 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: السبت مارس 19, 2005 9:03 pm
مشاركات: 1041
غير متصل
Republic of Yemen No:
President Date:
Attachments:

To: Minister of Justice
Minister of Interior Affairs
Attorney General


Please review the attached complaint from Mr. Yaya Al-Dailmy's Wife. According to the information and investigations at your side, he was charged with conspiring in riot against the American Embassy, Sa'ada City's latest events, and forming outlaw secret organization. In case the defendant is proved innocent, his situation should be reconsidered and he is released.



Ali Abdullah Saleh
President of the Republic of Yemen

Republic of Yemen No: 36
Parliament Date: 29/3/2005
President


To: Dr. Abdullah Al-Olifi
Attorney General

After greetings…

According to the complaint submitted to us by the sit-in united in soladitary persons with the scholar Yahya Hussain Al-Dailamy, and Scholar Mohamed Ahmed Muftah regarding the tyranny and threats they are being subjected to by the concerned penalty court, security forces and court guards and that is considered against the law and constitution.

Therefore, please review and instruct to release the two scholars because they are prisoners of opinion. Also, release the other arrested people on this case and stop this repeated violations of rights and freedom in application of the law and constitution.


Abdullah Bin Hussain Al-Ahmer
President of Parliament

Republic of Yemen No: 36
Parliament Date: 29/3/2005
President


To: Major/ Qaleb Al-Kamsh
Head of Central Corps of Political Security
After greetings…

According to the complaint submitted to us by the sit-in united in soladitary persons with the scholar Yahya Hussain Al-Dailamy, and Scholar Mohamed Ahmed Muftah regarding the tyranny and threats they are being subjected to by the concerned penalty court, security forces and court guards and that is considered against the law and constitution.

Therefore, please review and instruct to release the two scholars because they are prisoners of opinion. Also, release the other arrested people on this case and stop this repeated violations of rights and freedom in application of the law and constitution.


Abdullah Bin Hussain Al-Ahmer
President of Parliment

Republic of Yemen No: 36
Parliament Date: 29/3/2005
President


To: Major-Officer/ Dr. Rashad Mohamed Al-Alimi
Minster of Interior Affairs
After greetings…

According to the complaint submitted to us by the sit-in united in soladitary persons with the scholar Yahya Hussain Al-Dailamy, and Scholar Mohamed Ahmed Muftah regarding the tyranny and threats they are being subjected to by the concerned penalty court, security forces and court guards and that is considered against the law and constitution.

Therefore, please review and instruct to release the two scholars because they are prisoners of opinion. Also, release the other arrested people on this case and stop this repeated violations of rights and freedom in application of the law and constitution.


Abdullah Bin Hussain Al-Ahmer
President of Parliment


To: Dr. Adnan Al-Gifri / Minister of Justice
Dr. Rashad Al-Alimi / Minister of Interior Affairs
Dr. Abdullah Al-Olifi / Attorney General

After greetings…

As stated in the letter of His Excellency, Ali Abdullah Saleh, President of the Republic of Yemen ( may God Protect him) regarding scholar Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy ,we would like to inform you with the following facts just to remind you.

As the Attorney General and Minister of Interior Affairs know, during the investigations in the demonstration that marched towards the American Embassy then, scholar Yahya Al-Dailamy was investigated charged with inviting for demonstration without permission. The defense were presented. One of which was ignorance of law for that law was not published. He was found not guilty. As for the events that occurred in Sa'ada, and what he is being charged of supporting Hussain Al-Hothy, every one who knows him confirm that this idea is ruled out and he has no connection whatsoever with Al-Hothy . Besides, both of them has different opinion; scholar Yahya Al-Dailmy's works is teaching Holy Qura'an and its sciences from the Islamic jurisprudence and this is something Hussain Al-Hothy is against. So there is neither mutual relationship nor action.

As for the charge that he urged for a sit-in in Al-Shawkani mosque inviting to stop war and try mediation, the sit-in was intended by many scientists, parliament members, political parties members, socialites, and VIP's. Copy attached.

That sit-in was intended by every one who believes that the political leadership wants to stop war and needs a mass public cover to make the decision. Yet, it is just request sit-in and articles of demonstration law don't apply on it. It was just a sit-in to express opinion, still, the sit-in was not carried under the instructions of Minister of Interior Affairs who objected then that the sit-in be in the mosque. So the sit-in was stopped. If scholar Yahya Al-Dialmy wasn't reasonable person, the sit-in would had not been stopped. Please find attached a letter of Mr. Hassan Zid who was the mediator in that issue.

As for the society that is called " Sana'a's youth", it is a society project that has not developed, in other words, there was no suitable circumstances and potentials to form and register it. But it is not a secret society at all. It is the fruit of scholar Yahya AL-Dailamy's teachings, guidance and preaching which had good effect on young people. His teachings and guidance created committed awareness of law and constitution. Awareness that is free of neither extremism nor inflexibility. This society was supported by the authority, and Moatmer party; they supported the society's activities and needs, such as tents, military's supply with provisions, and chairs for festivals. The authority and Moatmer party sponsored, interacted and helped in demonstration that supports the Palestinian Cause. They allowed marches and provided media and press for them. They even opened ministerial divans to throw activities of "Sana'a Youth" society. The activities were attended by government officials. The documents in your side confirm all this. So how can this society be secret society with all this, it is incredible.

Every one of the public opinion thinks that there is a third party that conspires against those young men and the political leadership, it does not approve to see young men harmonious with the political leadership, young men who are aware, committed and active in law and constitution framework without any extremism. Also some of the people who are from opposition parties take advantage of this dispute and stir up the situation to protect their party who participated in the demonstration, because they are afraid they get involved and charged with causing riot. Maybe they think by fabricating a charge against those young men, they will get red of their fear and close the file.

These are the facts we wanted to present to your Excellency. We trust in your faithfulness and loyalty to instruct to what ensures good common of the community and the political leadership. This letter is to summarize the whole facts and not leave a space for any one to impose wrong facts and waste litigation principles and guarantees. Most important of which is confrontation and the right of defense before the concerned public persecution which the defense staff worked to communicate with, but no use. The public persecution purposely ignored the defense staff, did not update them with the taken procedures and refused any requests of that matter. Attached is a copy of the defense request and copy of our detailed complaint with most of the facts addressed to Ministry of Human Rights. We request from you to remember all that when you consider what would be presented to you of investigations. And please do according to the law in this matter by instructing to release our relative scholar Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy.

May God help you.


Thanks and Best Regards,


Ibrahim Hussain Al-Dailmy
On behalf of Yahya Hussain Al-Dailamy's relatives

التوقيع
عندما نصل إلى مرحلة الفناء على المنهج القويم ، أعتقد أنا قد وصلنا إلى خير عظيم .
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يونيو 21, 2005 2:34 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء إبريل 12, 2005 9:56 pm
مشاركات: 406
غير متصل
هذه ترجمة لـبيان المتضامنين الخاص بالعلامة / يحي الديلمي و العلامة / محمد مفتاح، و ذلك لمن أراد نشره وإرساله لكافة المنظمات والمؤسسات المحلية والاقليمية:

Declaration of the united in solidarity With Scholars Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy and Mohamed Muftah


We, the united in solidarity with scholars Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy and Mohamed Muftah, were astonished by the verdicts issued against them on Sunday 19th Rabee Al-Thani- 29/6/2005. The verdicts were death penalty for scholar Yahay Hussain Al-Dailmy, and 8 years jail for Mohamed Muftah. They were issued by what is called " Sana'a Specialized Penalty Court". Such verdicts were not expected despite the nature of the authority that issued the verdicts like the purpose of forming that court, the circumstances of scholars Yahya Hussain Al-Dailmy and Mohamed Muftah, and the series of inhuman practices and violations against the scholars' rights and freedom starting from:-

1- The violation of arresting the two scholars without legal ground or previous notice on September, locking them in unknown places and hiding them from their families, isolating them and not allowing them to meet or contact their lawyers, not acknowledging them with the reasons of all they were facing. Their lock up continued without legal ground and without transferring them to judicial authority until mid November 2004. All that is considered violation of items No (17, 9, 7) of the international treaty and political and civil rights, and items (12,9) of the international declaration of Human rights.
2- After they were transferred to the prosecution authority, the situation did not change. The prosecution did not act as expected in such breach and violation against the scholars' rights and freedom, even though their family presented complaints to the attorney general's office demanding justice and punishment for those who committed the violations against them. That is considered a violation of the prosecution's work obligation and law and constitution provisions. It is also considered violation of items No ( 17,2) of the international political and civil rights, items No (8,7) of international declaration of human rights, and against items No (12,13,14,16) of the provisions of the united nations concerning the instructional principles of the prosecution members. The prosecution didn't provide any of the international standards in the procedures it took against the scholars. It didn't give them any chance to defend themselves. No confrontation was made, and it purposely dodged and ignored the defense.
3- The prosecution presented illegal bill of indictment regarding the claims against the scholars. The items which the prosecution attributed the bill of indictment to do not incriminate the scholars. That bill of indictment is considered a plane violation of human rights and fundamental freedom in all treaties and international agreements especially political treaties such as political and civil rights, international declaration of human rights, and the declaration of defenders of human rights.
Those allegations were like unknown puzzles, because no actions were clarified, nor allegations facts and other physical evidences with the rest of the evidence as stated in penal procedures law. The prosecution in their case relied on results of offenses and violations of human rights and basic freedom stated in article (1) and on plundered things through breaking and entry to their homes without legal warrant in which is against the Yemeni law and constitution. That is also considered offense to their private lives and the lives of the rest of their families under force of arm. We considered them fabricated evidence. Besides, the scholars' families have filed to the general prosecution complaints about the fabrication and distortion that happened.

4- The prosecution presented its bill of indictment before exceptional court called "Specialized Penalty Court" which its foundation was a breach of the constitution and law, because it is exceptional court and new version of state security's courts. Yemeni constitution as well as law totally prohibits forming such courts whatever the name is. In addition to that, the taken procedures and the issued verdict clearly confirm that there is no doubt about the EXCEPTIONAL quality for such courts. Since these kinds of courts lack legitimacy, it is natural that its verdicts are illegal. Such courts are known for practicing with violation of defense principles, litigations guarantee. The least international criterions of judicial were not obtainable.
5- One of the facts attributed to them in the bill of indictment is something that is an essence of human rights and basic freedom guaranteed by international agreements, that is the right to assemble and form societies, the right to consolidate rights, freedom and acquire and exchange information about them, which ensures its protection and spreading. Also one of thing that were on the list of indictment was the right to work to protect those right and taking stands, which ensure stopping the violation in the frame of law( like stay-in strike to stop the violation of human rights in life and personal security that was happening in Sa'ada). That strike was more like a human and legal obligation according to the announcement of protecting the human rights defenders in the least amount of opinion expression which is considered a breach of all international treaties specially. They are the ones stated in item No (14) of the international treaty, item No (10) of the world announcement for human rights and against the items of United Nation's principles concerning independence of judicial system.
6- The trail was unfair and did not comply with the minimum worldly standards. The court divested the scholars from constitutionally and legally ensured means of defense. The scholars were not informed with the allegations against them in details, no facilities were presented to the defense, instead the defense side were hindered, and the defense lawyers were cornered. They were not even able to apply the basic requirements to ensure the necessary obligations in defending according to the nature of their job and law, as that judicial authority refused to provide them even with copy of the papers. The court stayed hesitated the whole trail to approve that request which made the defense side walk out of the case since it presence made no difference and does not serve justice. Instead, their presence made the trail legal although it lacked the simplest defense rights that were ensured in civilized laws, especially in the Yemeni constitution and world announcement of human rights etc.
7- That Judicial authority followed one side in the trail, that is the prosecution side without the presence of neither the defense side, nor the scholars themselves, because they refused the illegal and inhuman practices against them, and because they did not have any chance to defend themselves. Their request to postpone the trail until they appoint defense lawyers of their choice to attend was denied. Then defense lawyer was appointed for them by the court not by them. He was imposed on them despite their protest that reached hunger strike. That led them to be tortured by locking them in a place for inhuman usage, prohibiting them of visitation right or allowing them to meet any one of their family or friends. They even arrested members of their families and did not release them until they wrote statement promising not to attend the trail sessions. These kinds of actions are against the principle of overtness, and against constitution provisions, law, item No (14) of the international treaty of political and civil rights and against the above-mentioned items. The situation reached to the extent of assaulting the solidarity crowd through swearwords, arrests, shooting fire to scare them away, and prohibiting them from attending the trail sessions. The thing that is disapproved the most of the court that issued the verdict and is considered a proof of nullity of the procedures was the deposition of Mr. Al-Azani, and not paying attention to the defenses he presented, all this is conclusive evidence that the verdicts were only on one side, because there is no rule of the defense side. The court issued the verdict in a condition of resentment for the scholars clung to their rights of freedom of defense and refused the artificial rule imposed on them by the court. Therefore, those verdicts were as a reaction to their stands, which clearly shows that the court was not neutral.
8- The two scholars issued an announcement and turned a copy to the court who included it in its record. The announcement stated complaints of the assaults and violation against them and their families. It also stated that those violations against them were registered on papers with that authority, and that the refusal of that authority was based on the imposition of the prosecution not to enable them of their rights specially their right to have a copy of those papers. Those procedures were made so the violations won't be exposed, nor what their announcement included of violations of the principles and necessary standards of judicial system and judiciary in the action of the judicial authority. All that proves that they are assigned and the verdict was already decided.
9- We came up to those facts through our follow up and field examinations of the case as defenders of human rights, we see that it is our obligation , and in despondence to the human call for aid by the two scholars through hunger striking and the issued statements of their families and the sitter-in solidarity, we address this announcement to the Yemeni public opinion to acknowledge them about the scary facts concealed behind the unfair results the awful verdict have reached to against the two scholars, the Yemeni judicial system and the Yemeni and human society as a whole. We address this announcement to the outer public opinion specially to the authorities, local, regional and international organizations of human rights. We hope that this case will be paid attention to for the implications of clear violations of human rights in it. And that soon an action will be taken to release the two scholars who are prisoners of opinion. We wish that the necessary arrangements will be taken to investigate with all the people who committed those violation and to give fair compensate to the scholars families the damages they suffered from.

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يونيو 21, 2005 2:38 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء إبريل 12, 2005 9:56 pm
مشاركات: 406
غير متصل
عذرا لاني وضعت ترجمة البيان قبل أن أتأكد من أن أخي المطهر كان قد وضعها.
أعتذر مرة أخرى.

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يونيو 21, 2005 11:48 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الأربعاء مايو 25, 2005 10:12 pm
مشاركات: 44
غير متصل
Hi,
what an excellent job!!! well, yesterday i read a thesis for a friend of mine . He did his LLM in Human rights Law. Anyway, his thesis was about the war in Sa'ada. it is 60 pages research and it was a great job. it is availabe with me and it is all under your order.

regards


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الأربعاء يونيو 22, 2005 10:06 am 
معلومات العضو
مشرفين مجالس آل محمد (ع)
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: السبت إبريل 09, 2005 6:22 pm
مشاركات: 1060
غير متصل
Dear Truth Seeker,
اقتباس:
it is availabe with me and it is all under your order

Could you please scan all pages using an OCR and them put them here. If you couldn't , kindly scan them as images and post them.
Thanks a lot in advance.

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة: شكرا لكل الجهود
مشاركةمرسل: الأربعاء يونيو 22, 2005 6:43 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: السبت مايو 14, 2005 9:23 pm
مشاركات: 32
مكان: اليمن
غير متصل
جهد رائع جدا ومشكور وبارك الله فيكم


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الأربعاء يونيو 22, 2005 11:40 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الأربعاء مايو 25, 2005 10:12 pm
مشاركات: 44
غير متصل
Dear Nadir,
I have it in a word. format. i think it is one of the best researches will really summerize the whole events. it is 72 pages with ober 250 references. i want to sent it to some one and then you can upload it to the websites or do what ever you like.
Salam


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الاثنين يونيو 27, 2005 8:12 pm 
معلومات العضو
مدير مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الاثنين ديسمبر 15, 2003 10:41 am
مشاركات: 178
غير متصل
الأخت وجدان بارك الله في جهودك كما ترين لقد تم نقل نسخة من الموضوع هنا في المجلس الإنجليزي لذلك نرجو منك تعديل عنوان الموضوع باللغة الإنجليزية حتى يستطيع من لا يقرأ العربية معرفة محتوى الموضوع


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الأربعاء يوليو 13, 2005 9:06 pm 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء إبريل 12, 2005 9:56 pm
مشاركات: 406
غير متصل
هذه ترجمة لنص الحكم الصادر على العالمين / الديلمي و مفتاح.
الرجاء إرساله ونشره على أوسع نطاق لنكمل آخر فصول المسرحية الهزلية (عفواً لا أظنها الأخيرة)...
فنص الحكم هذا (في نظري) يعتبر من أجمل فصول هذه المسرحية.


Following is the full text of the verdict of Al-Dailami and Miftah:

After hearing and reviewing the case, it was clear that the Public Prosecution has requested the court to inflict the harshest legal punishments on the accused in accordance with articles (21, item No. 1 of 128, 129, 131, 135, and 136). According to the Prosecution, the indicted have sought to communicate with a foreign country in such a manner that damages the political and diplomatic status of the country and took part in a so-called criminal accord that aims to jeopardize the work of constitutional authorities. The Prosecution argued that the indicted sought to change these authorities and pressure them to neglect their responsibilities. The overall aim is to to topple the regime and for that purpose, they have established what they called the “Sana’a Youth” congregation. Additionally, the accused have provoked for strikes that start from the places of worship.

All of these attempts are also associated with the crimes committed by Hussein Badr Aldeen Al-Houthi and his gang which has rebelled from the Miran region and disobeyed the Government. According to the same source, the accused have committed a number of crimes and did not respond to the charges against them with any justifiable evidence, making the court obliged to postpone the verdict several times to ensure fairness of trial. To add insult to injury, the indicted did not show any cooperation with the court, making the court obliged to act by inflicting penal provisions as per articles 353 and 363 of the penal provisions law.

According to article 321/2 of the aforementioned law, it is the responsibility of the person or body to prove the alleged incident or crime. On this basis, the public prosecutor was requested to prove the charges against the accused. The court has relied heavily on the past two hearings, the documented interrogations, the confessions of the accused and some documents to this effect.

On these grounds, it was evident that Al-Dailami has communicated with the Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Sana’a and met with him six times. One of these meetings was in the form of a business lunch in which Al-Dailami requested support from Iran, in the presence of Miftah. The Ambassador advised both guests of the need to establish associations that may qualify for receiving Iranian support. Moreover, Al-Dailami confessed that he used to communicate with a person at the Embassy of Iran, called Ali Jumboz, and that they both shared each other’s contact information. Al-Dailami also admitted that he traveled to Iran to attend a conference on Palestine.

At another level, Al-Dailami admitted that he met one day with a group of people at the residence of Mr. Amin Hajjar, his brother-in-law. After deliberations, the group decided to launch a strike from Imam Shawkani’s Mosque with a view to ceasing the ongoing war in Sa’da between the government forces and the rebel group of Al-Houthi. The group felt that the fight has exceeded its normal course. The group then consulted the Zaydi leader Mr. Mohammed Al-Mansour on their decision, and were advised not to launch the strike as he will personally issue a correspondence to the President of Yemen. The purpose of the communication is to call for a cease fire and to inform him of their intention to go on a strike.

Afterwards, the letter was faxed and a reply was received from the President indicating that the person who really needed the advice is the rebel Hussein Badr Aldeen Al-Houthi. The group met again, including Miftah, at the same place and for the same purpose and agreed to launch the strike from Al-Shawkani’s Mosque. Later, Al-Dailami knew that strikes from mosques are legally prohibited, so he consulted the group and they decided to begin the strike from the headquarters of the Socialist Party.

Among the confessions of Al-Dailami was that he has visited Sa’ada several times to visit clerics, including Hussein Badr Aldeen Al-Houthi and that he has had the opportunity to review only one handout by Al-Houthi entitled “no excuse for people before Allah”. The document was distributed at a conference held by Al-Houthi. Additionally, Al-Dailami also admitted before the prosecution that he and Mr. Ali Al-Bukari are the main officials in charge of running what is called the “Sana’a Youth”. This group has organized four demonstrations. As for the “Faithful Youth”, he responded by referring to six main members: Mr. Mohammed Yahya Salim Azzan, Ali Al-Ruzami, Abdulkarim Jadban and Mohammed Badr Aldeen Al-Houthi as well as others that are unknown to him.

Furthermore, the last two investigations made it clear that Miftah had some relationship with Ali Jumboz, the Cultural attaché at the Embassy of Iran and has known him for four years until now. The investigations revealed that Miftah used to visit Jumboz at his office rather frequently. Once, Al-Dailami informed Miftah about a lunch invitation with the Ambassador of Iran. During this lunch, the Iranian Ambassador explained to the accused how the system of governance in Iran works.

Another realization was that Miftah visited Iran in 1997 in response to an invitation from the scientific office of the religious authority, Al-Sistani. He spent twelve days in Iran and, at another level, he attended two meetings at the house of Amin Hajjar. According to Miftah, the meetings were aimed at achieving cease fire in Sa’ada between the Government troops and the rebel groups of Hussein Badr Aldeen Al-Houthi. After several discussions, the group decided to launch a strike from Al-Shawkani Mosque. Then, this venue was replaced by the headquarters of the Socialist Party. Ultimately, the strike was launched and, according to Miftah, Al-Dailami was one of the implementers of the strike.

Miftah’s role was limited to encouraging people to participate in the strike and taking part in two organized demonstrations organized by the Sana’a Youth. He also used the mosque’s platform to announce the time and venue of the two demonstrations. In one of his sermons, Miftah pointed out that the military campaign against the rebel Al-Houthi is not the right solution to the problem. He stressed that the Faithful Youth have been organizing intensive educational activities in several places of Sa’ada for almost twelve years thus far. This effort brought together Mohammed Yahya Salim Azzan, Abdulkarim Judban and Mohammed Badr Aldeen Al-Houthi. Miftah also indicated that he has read parts of the handout distributed by the rebel Al-Houthi which was included in the Books' Exhibition and then returned the handout to the person who gave it to him.

From all what has been said, the responses of both accused, during investigations, were confessions about attempts to communicate with and work for the interests of the Iranian government, thereby jeopardizing the political and diplomatic position of the Yemeni Government. They have also taken the lead in pushing the political leadership, represented by President Ali Abdullah Saleh, to take a ceasefire decision in the Sa'ada conflict between Government troops and the rebel fighters of Al-Houthi and his “gang”.

These confessions provide ample evidence against the accused, making them liable to their actions as per article 87 of law of certitude. Therefore, the court shall depend on this evidence for the purposes of this trial. Also, document No. 1 related to the first charge, Al-Dailami has maintained communications with the Iranian Government, has requested them insistently to provide his organization with support and training. According to Al-Dailami and his followers, the Iranian revolution was an inspirational solution and the only road towards achieving prosperity in the Muslim world. He also expressed his group's wish to universalize the spirit of the Iranian revolution allover the world. To them, the Iranian revolution represents the fulfillment of faith by following God's decree.

Additionally, Al-Dailami indicated that he and his young followers are facing tremendous challenges, some internal and others external. In one document, Al-Dailami noted that his group is composed of young faithful people with talents and skills in many areas of knowledge. He emphasizes the richness of Zaydi's manuscripts, books, mosques and historical figures whose spirit needs to be revived. The document also indicates the revolutionary thinking of this young group who also aspire to revive the spirit of the family of the Prophet. The document also stressed the special needs of young people of northern Yemen for further training, awareness raising, discipline and organizational skills. Al-Dailami concluded his account by re-emphasizing the call for preparing these young people, educating and training them, so that they become advocates of human rights and trainers for others. According to him, these youth should be supported with books and references, trained in policy formulation and self-organization, as well as in intellectual communication and systematic promotion of Islamic values.

The court views all of the above as reliable pieces of the evidence that proves that the accused have maintained communication with Iran or anyone who serves its interests. In the case of Al-Dailami, item (d) of article 323 of the penal provision law is applicable, further supported by document No. 2 of the case’s folder which refers to the establishment of a religious jihadi (struggling) movement, indicates the goals of the movements, the means by which these goals can be achieved and the bylaws for its operations. Attached to this document was an annex that projects a practical plan during the summer vacation in which it is hoped that young people would acquire more knowledge and become more convinced to join the jihadi movement and preaching activities.

The second indicted person, Miftah, has acted as the cultural official of this movement. One document indicates the terms and conditions for membership with the group. The document does not carry a name or a signature. However, it was found at the house of Al-Dailami, according to the police raid's report of 27 October 2004.


In addition, the third document was in the form of a letter sent by Al-Dailami to famous Zaydi cleric Almurtadha bin Zayd. In this document, Al-Dailami presented his remarks, including on issues related to the sustainability and sound organization of religious scholarship and movement. According to the letter, a long-term plan should be developed in such a way that goes beyond one individual organization.

Moreover, the organization needs influential figures and strengthened relationships with all Islamic movements around the world, thereby emphasizing the need for sharing experiences and implementing joint programs. We also should mobilize further support from wealthy Yemeni people abroad who still have an interest in Yemen.

Also, in document 6 of the prosecutor’s folder, Al-Dailami requested Al-Murtadha Al-Muhatwari to form a secret committee and another public one, as well as financial and educational committees, etc. He indicated that there is ample opportunity to work if serious and organized action is exerted. The document has also called for cautiously requesting support from the family of Hamid Aldeen. Also document No. 4 of the first prosecutor’s folder provided an indication to the initial steps that were taken to organize the work of the movement.

The same applies to document No. 7 of the first prosecutor’s folder. This document presented many of the bylaws of the “I’tisam Charitable Association”. Document No. 8 of the first prosecutor’s folder constituted a letter from Almurtadha bin Zayd Al-Muhadhwari to an unidentified group in which he indicated that there were great achievements during a relatively short period of time. Al-Muhadhwari pointed out that he has taken the advice and is implementing it item by item to realize the organization's cause. All of the documents from second to eighth were regarded by the court as sound evidence.

After reviewing the documents of the second folder of the case, the court found information and ideas related to activating the "Sana'a Youth" as well as names of active members in the group, including Ali Abdullah Alkabari whom was considered by Al-Dailami the person in charge of organization. This has also been concurred with Al-Dailami's own confession during investigation by the public prosecution. The documents also included two letters to famous personalities (no need to mention names) in which Al-Dailami explained what the Zaydi movement is about. Within the documents was also a letter to Dr. Al-Murtadha bin Zayd in which he was described as the sole and highest leader of scientific, cultural and jihadi movement in Yemen.

On this basis, the court regards the documents presented in the case's second folder as reliable evidence against Al-Dailami. The attempt to conduct an unlawful act can in itself be punishable if adequate evidence was gathered so long as the act itself is punishable. Since communication with another country is legally punishable, the attempt is also punishable if reasonable grounds of certainty can be established. The attempt in this case was demonstrated by their frequent visits to the Ambassador of the Iranian government and the continuous communications with the cultural attaché of the Embassy for a period of over three years, in addition to the travel to Iran.

Given the sensitivity of the accusations, the indicted become subject to legal provisions on the basis of threat rather than actual damage. Threats of this nature can cause great damage on the society by encouraging criminal behaviors across the country. From this standpoint, the actual damage is not necessary for penal provisions to be taken, so long as there was certitude about the attempt.

Moreover, Al-Dailami has sought to commit a penal act in communicating with a foreign country's ambassador and personnel. Obviously, the communication damages the political and diplomatic status of the government, as per document No. 1 of the defense's first folder. Al-Dailami requested support from and cooperation of Iran in training and organizing activities. He also commended Iran's governance experience and wished to see this version of governance spread it in all parts of the world. He described many tribes, especially in the northern part of the country, as revolutionary and longing for the spirit of the school of thought of the family of the prophet. They only need the "equipment" and the "tools" to make it happen, if the term is appropriate. The evidence presented to the court indicates, beyond any doubt, that there was a deliberate criminal intention behind Al-Dailami's communication with the foreign country.

While Miftah denied that Al-Dailami has requested support from the Iranian Ambassador, Al-Dailami himself admitted it has happened in the presence of Miftah. Therefore, Miftah's affirmation remains questionable, and hence unreliable. The evidence, therefore, remains insufficient to determine the intentionality of any criminal act by Al-Dailami. According to him, the communication with Mr. Ali Jumboz, the cultural attaché of the Iranian Embassy, was all on legitimate things, given the nature of his work as a bookshop owner. The court considers this justification acceptable and reasonable. The same applies to the Embassy of Iran, it is not clear to the court that there was a deliberate intention behind sending the accused to Iran.

Since the court can only rely on sound evidence and since it was clear to the court that Al-Dailami was intending to inflict an aggression against the constitutional authorities, the evidence available to the court was adequate to complete the legal elements necessary for reaching a decision. There is no need for further explanation as there is ample evidence to support the court's decision.

Among the findings of the court is that the case is of a public security nature in which the actual damage is not necessarily a precondition for taking preventive penal provisions within the framework of the law. It only requires a criminal behavior that poses a potential threat even if no damage has momentarily been inflicted. All evidence has complemented and reinforced each other in such a way that proves that Al-Dailami has attempted to communicate with a foreign state or to serve those who work for its interests, thereby deserving to be subject to legal provisions. The attempt damages the political and diplomatic position of the country. It was evident that both Al-Dailami and Miftah had the intention to prevent the executive authorities from fulfilling their professional duties and forcing them to take certain decisions during the war. The rest of the charges were considered unfounded.

As such, the accused were convicted of the charges against them as per article 321 of the penal provisions law. This article stipulates that no conviction against anybody should be valid unless there was absolute evidence. The evidence has to be assessed by the court for completeness before it can be used. Item No. 1 of Article 128 of the Republican decree related to law No. 12 of 1994 on penal provisions indicates that the attempt to communicate with another country, work for its interests and/or build relationships with any of its personnel in this connection is punishable by the death sentence only if this communication could damage the war, political, diplomatic or economic status of the country.

Article 3 of the Republican decree related to the aforementioned law stipulates a punishment of not less than three years and not more than ten years of imprisonment to whomever provokes for violence or proved to have intended to threaten or otherwise to make a change or amendment in the decisions of the legislative, judicial or executive authorities, or preventing them from fulfilling their constitutional mandates or forcing them to take certain decisions. Also, article 29 of the Republican decree related to the same law points out that whoever provokes or engage in an criminal agreement to commit any crime set forth by the law in relation to what was mentioned above or any crime that is punishable with the same penal provisions even if the act did not result in any effects.

Since Al-Dailami has committed two crimes and has not yet been punished for any of them, the relevant punishment for attempting to communicate with or serve the interests of a foreign state is the execution in retribution to acts that are set forth in item No. 1 of Article 128, stated within the Republican decree of the relevant law.

Furthermore, the attempt to engage in activities that threatens authorities in order to prevent the executive authorities from fulfilling their constitutional duties and forcing them to take certain decisions is ten years of imprisonment as per item No. 2 of 131 of the relevant law.

Moreover, there were unjustifiable delays by the defense committee in presenting their defense under the pretext that the court did not provide them with a copy of the case's folder, although they know that the decision to share a copy of the comprehensive folder of the case is subject to the desertion of the court and as it deems necessary, as per article 314 of the penal provisions. However, it is the right of litigants to review the documents related to the prosecution as soon as they show their commitment to attend before the court. Despite all this, the court has decided in one of its hearings to allow the defense to take copies of the interrogations and hearings as well as supporting evidence. However, the defense insisted in getting copies of all documents of the folder without any exception. The defense committee, on Sunday 20 Thulhijjah and 30 January 2005, announced that it is withdrawing from the trial. This committee insisted on its position, obliging the court to assign the Lawyer Mohammed Mohammed Al-Azani to respond to the evidence and discuss them and finally to present his defense.

At the hearing the assigned lawyer prepared a memo and I granted him the permission to present it. However, the indicted offended him and threw unjustifiable accusations. They requested him to refrain from defending them, so the court had no choice but to ignore his defense report although it had some reasonable argument. The court's decision was based on the fact that the accused have the right to hire lawyers/defense of their choice, or even to defend oneself. The court is not obliged to assign defense for the accused so long as the accused has willfully chosen otherwise. The only responsibility that lies on the court is to emphasize to the accused the importance of having a defense and of presenting one's case through specialized lawyers or even by oneself, in accordance with the law.

Therefore, and as a result of all of the proceedings and reasons presented in this verdict, the court has decided to subject the two accused persons to the following penal provisions:

First: the death sentence for the first convicted person, Yahya Hussein Al-Dailami, in retribution;

Second: eight years of imprisonment for the second convicted person, Mohammed Ahmed Ahmed Miftah, starting as of the date in which he was arrested.

Third: the convicted persons reserve the right to appeal within 15 days of today.

This is what I received and upon which I reached this verdict.

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
 عنوان المشاركة:
مشاركةمرسل: الثلاثاء يناير 03, 2006 10:17 am 
معلومات العضو
مشترك في مجالس آل محمد
إحصائيات العضو

اشترك في: الثلاثاء إبريل 12, 2005 9:56 pm
مشاركات: 406
غير متصل
Statement of the Parties of Joint Meeting

The parties of the joint meeting anxiously observed the issued verdicts by the Specialized Court of Appeal against Scholar Yahya Hussain AL-Dailami and Scholar Ahmed Moftah on 3/12/2005. Its verdicts supported the former verdict issued by the primary penalty court; execution for Scholar Yahya, and 8 years jail for scholar Ahmed. These verdicts disappointed the nation in terms of the existence of honest and fair judiciary system. The parties of the joint meeting insisted invalidating exceptional, illegal and non-constitutional courts who tyrannized Scholars Yahay & Ahmed. Their lawyers were even prohibited of photocopying the case file . This case and trial were also accompanied by repressive procedures, military and security actions, beating, arrestment, and threats against defendants' lawyers, family and people united in solidarity with the scholars. some were forced to sign papers promising not to attend the trail.
These verdicts and procedures of the trail really offended Yemeni judiciary and Human Right's record inside the country and outside.
The parties of the joint meeting believe that these kinds of trails and verdicts violate Human rights and freedom of speech, therefore they should be corrected through authority's commitment with constitution, law, human rights conventions and agreements, international justice standards, and judicial proceedings.

We demand that the specialized penalty court be null, Scholars Yahya AL-Dailami & Ahmed Moftah, the prisoners of opinion, be released , the general amnesty stated by President Ali Abdallah Saleh be implemented and stopping Sada'a's war & its effects which are threatening national unity, civil peace and the concept of Yemeni coexistence.

Joint Meeting Parties
Yemeni Islah Party
Yemeni Socialist Party
AL-Wahdawi AL-Shaabi AL-Naseri Party
AL-Baath Party
AL-Haq Party
AL-Qwa AL-Shabia Yemeni Union

التوقيع
صورة


أعلى
 يشاهد الملف الشخصي  
رد مع اقتباس  
عرض مشاركات سابقة منذ:  مرتبة بواسطة  
إرسال موضوع جديد الرد على الموضوع  [ 31 مشاركة ]  الانتقال إلى صفحة السابق  1, 2, 3  التالي

جميع الأوقات تستخدم GMT + 3 ساعات
اليوم هو الثلاثاء مايو 26, 2020 2:42 am


الموجودون الآن

المستخدمون المتصفحون لهذا المنتدى: لا يوجد أعضاء مسجلين متصلين و 3 زائر/زوار


لا تستطيع كتابة مواضيع جديدة في هذا المنتدى
لا تستطيع كتابة ردود في هذا المنتدى
لا تستطيع تعديل مشاركاتك في هذا المنتدى
لا تستطيع حذف مشاركاتك في هذا المنتدى
لا تستطيع إرفاق ملف في هذا المنتدى

البحث عن:
الانتقال الى:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
ترجم بواسطة phpBBArabia | Design tansformation:bbcolors
  تصميم الستايل علاء الفاتك   http://www.moonsat.net/vb  
jurisdictionbeautifulbakednylongamersparanoidstratfordwinery