Naming and shaming may be brutal but it works

If properly regulated, naming and shaming could cut down on people doing bad things, argues Rym Ghazal

In both the First and Second World Wars, women accused of collaborating with the enemy would be paraded with shaved heads. Three Lions / Getty Images

A while ago, if you were caught doing something wrong, you received the mark of shame.

From disruptive jet skiers to those who followed women in public places and yelled out their telephone numbers, all these men risked their heads being shaved. Then they would either be paraded in public or their photos were published in the local newspapers.

This naming and shaming happened mainly in the 1990s in parts of the Gulf. The misbehaving men would have to sign police pledges they would not do it again. It seemed to work. Fewer photos appeared in the papers.

Once, while we were on a school trip in a bus headed to Medina, we were followed by several cars full of men. Our teacher yelled at them out of the window and threatened to call the police. Within seconds of her pulling out a camera, the cars drove off. This was before smart phones, so a proper camera was king.

These days, only those serving time have their heads shaved. But this form of punishment is not confined to the Arab world. It has been used as a form of public humiliation across the world. People accused of adultery, especially women, would often be punished in this way and would either walk or sit backwards on a donkey to be paraded through the town.

In both the First and Second World Wars, women accused of collaborating with the enemy would be paraded with shaved heads, while people spat on them. At least 20,000 women in France had their heads shaved in the wake of Germany’s defeat. I doubt there was any proper investigation and I’m sure many were unjustly accused. In older Arabic newspapers – from the 1970s in the UAE for instance – it was common to use the “name and shame” tactics in work-related matters.

There wasn’t much regulation, so you might find photos of people in the paper perhaps with the injunction that they were not be trusted professionally as they had decamped without paying their dues or some such.

If there is to be any naming and shaming, it has to be based on evidence and after a proper investigation. There is room for abuse, for instance, posting photos of women in public forums and shaming them for what they wear.

Last month, a call for a new kind of naming and shaming was made at the Shura Council in Saudi Arabia. It was suggested that people who torture and maim animals be named and shamed, in addition to other legal punishment. Since some of the animal abusers post videos of the torture to which the animals are subjected, and boast about it on social media, council members said that the same channels should be used to name and shame them. The chairman of the committee on water, agriculture and environment, Ali Al Tikhais, said that if the criminals were not severely punished and named, other people might think their actions were permitted by law.

As an avid animal rights activist, I am all for this. Perhaps it is one way to stop these cruel acts. Reputation is everything. I have heard of people who were fined but went back to hurting animals because the punishment was not severe enough. Unless there are high costs, perhaps enormous fines, long periods of time in jail, and perhaps as the Shura Council brought up, naming and shaming, why would an animal abuser stop?

Sometimes, it is a psychological issue, so a psychological form of punishment may be one of the ways to dissuade people from abusing animals.

If properly regulated, naming and shaming could really work.

On Twitter: @ArabianMau