Bahrain court allows spouses access rights to each other’s phones

TDT | Manama    

The Daily Tribune – www.newsofbahrain.com

In a landmark decision, the Bahrain Court of Cassation established an important legal principle, affirming the permissibility of one spouse having access to the other’s phone whenever necessary.

The court emphasised that the relationship between husband and wife is distinct from that of a third party, particularly regarding the confidentiality of correspondence.

“The marriage contract imposes on both spouses the responsibility of maintaining the family and preserving its entity and reputation, granting each of them certain entitlements that are not permissible for others to monitor, akin to monitoring a colleague’s behaviour or conduct when necessary,” the Court stated in a ruling.

The Court’s ruling came in response to a case involving a convict who was sentenced to two years of imprisonment after her husband discovered an illicit relationship she had with another person, who also confessed to the incident and received the same sentence.

The appellant’s lawyer argued that the evidence provided by the husband, which was obtained surreptitiously from her phone, may have been manipulated and that the confession of the second accused, the appellant’s partner in the crime, should not be considered sufficient for conviction under Sharia law, which requires the presence of four witnesses for the crime of adultery.

However, the Court of Cassation affirmed that if a husband has strong suspicions regarding his wife’s behaviour, he has the right to seize any suspicious messages he finds in her bag or phone, even if done surreptitiously, as long as it takes place within his house and under his sight.

“The husband can then use this evidence to testify against his wife if he decides to pursue criminal charges for violating the marriage contract,” the Court stated. The court determined, based on the specifics of the case, that the husband had legitimate suspicions, and upon examining the appellant’s phone, no objectionable conversations were found.

“The Court may rely on this evidence, along with the confession of the appellant’s partner, particularly since the appellant did not deny or contest the evidence,” the Court underscored.