Page 277 - Bahrain Gov annual reports (V a)_Neat

45

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
(Report by Mr. Salim A1 Araydh, Superintendent of the Department)
Senior Courts. The two senior courts continued to be presided over by Shaikh Daij bin
Hamad, O.B.E., and Shaikh Ali bin Ahmed. On Mondays these two magistrates sit together
with the Adviser to the Bahrain Government and the Judicial Adviser. During the year 1504
cases were filed of which 664 were civil and estate cases, 356 were land registration cases and 484
were criminal eases. There were no criminal eases of particular importance and at the end of
the year all those before the court had been disposed of.
The two courts dealt with 1,298 cases leaving 206 cases pending at the end of 1955.
Small Courts. During the year 2,446 cases were disposed of; at the end of 1955 there were
682 pending cases.
The total amount of fines collected was Rs. 9,842 and court fees amounted to Rs. 68,256.
The Sunni and Shia Shera courts dealt with 537 and 250 cases respectively, leaving 94 and
31 cases pending.
The Maglis Tajara heard 134 cases and disposed of 100 cases.
Appeal Courts. The Shia Appeal Quadi heard 27 cases and had 4 cases pending at the
end of the year, the Lower Appeal Court gave judgment in 29 cases out of 43 and the Senior
Appeal Court decided 40 cases out of 47.
In October Mr. Wasfi Nimcr, a Palestinian barrister-at-law joined the staff of the Bahrain
Courts and was appointed as Registrar.
Criminal Code
In the past the Bahrain Courts have never used any official Code. When social and political
conditions were less complicated than they are today the public attached no importance to this
fact. When important cases were tried in the courts the magistrates used as a guide the criminal
code and criminal procedure code of the Sudan, which resemble closely the Indian Codes and
which have the advantage of being published in Arabic. In recent years one of the chief criticisms
which has been made about the courts was that they functioned without a set code. The recent
popular demand for a Code was put forward after the government had already taken steps
to produce a suitable code for its courts. As far back as 1952 the question of this code was
under discussion.
In 1953 it was decided that a Criminal Code, suitable for Bahrain and for all the other Gulf
states should be drafted in London by the legal authorities of the Foreign office. It was agreed
that this Code, with any changes that appeared to be necessary, should be adopted by the
Bahrain Government for use in its courts. During 1953, 1954 and in the early part of 1955
discussions took place between the Bahrain Government and the British authorities and
between the Legal Adviser to the Government and Judge Haines on the subject of the Code.
The draft of a Code was produced and after discussions a certain number of alterations were
made in the Code, a few sections and definitions were redrafted and the final version for use in
the Bahrain courts was eventually accepted. The changes which were made did not affect the
general tenor of the Code but they made it more applicable to the requirements and conditions
of the Bahrain Courts.
The Code was approved by His Highness in April, it was printed in June, in book form, to
be issued to the public on 1st July and to come into force on 1st August. The British Govern­
ment was to have issued its Code on the same date for use in the courts of H.B.M.’s Political
Agent.
There was a certain leakage of information about the Code, as is inevitable in the case of
any documents etc., which are printed locally, and even before it was made public there was
opposition to it on the grounds that a Code would prove contrary to religious law. On June 29th
His Highness issued a proclamation to the effect that nothing in the Code would affect the
laws governing religious matters; this action was taken to allay the fears of some of the public
that the Code was contrary to certain aspects of Moslem law, though in fact the Shera courts
in Bahrain have not for over 20 years dealt with criminal cases, except those concerned with,
marriage and divorce.
The Code was published on 1st July. Immediately the “Higher Executive Committee”
organised agitation against its being enforced. They succeeded in stirring up the public, most of
whom had not even read the Code. The Government endeavoured to find out what sections of