Saudi Arabia is strictly enforcing two specific regulations: the Anti-Cybercrimes Law (2008) and the Penal Law for Crimes of Terrorism and its Financing (2014). The vagueness of their content has been repeatedly utilized by the Saudi authorities to apprehend and imprison political dissidents or peaceful demonstrators arbitrarily.
The majority of the cases are brought before the Specialised Criminal Court (SCC), inaugurated in 2008, and which has been under major scrutiny as far as accountability is concerned. While being merely a judicial tool, the SCC operates more like a political tool in the hands of the Saudi government aimed at suppressing those who attempt to bring certain issues to the fore of the country.
It is especially concerning when people are targeted simply for being suspected of interacting with dissidents or for posting on social media that contravenes the above laws. There are numerous examples of people being arbitrarily arrested and prosecuted without a fair trial for these purposes. Furthermore, a recent case is worth noting and provokes discussion regarding Saudi Arabia’s enforcement of these limitations on freedom of expression.
British citizen Ahmed al-Doush was arrested on August 31 while he was accompanying his family to Riyadh’s King Khalid International Airport. The man was given no explanation for his arrest and could not speak to his family or to diplomatic officials for 33 days.
Despite being able to converse with UK officials, the reasons behind his arrest remained ambiguous, and he is now set to undergo trial without an adequate charge. According to sources, a possible allegation could concern al-Doush being the friend of an individual whose father is a Saudi dissident. His wife disclosed that the lawyer later denied knowledge of the case, which added to the obscurity and controversy surrounding the fairness of the trial.
This is yet another example of the Saudi government employing the anti-terrorism legislations as a mechanism for stifling freedom of expression and putting someone on trial through arbitrary detention. In this instance, the individual involved is not even a Saudi citizen. Al-Doush is a citizen of another nation who came to Saudi Arabia on holiday and does not have any record of political activism. This is against the image that Saudi Arabia has been seeking to present to itself in recent years, that of being progressive and open to receiving tourists.
Consequently, if Saudi Arabia’s objective is to attract as many people as possible, this repression of freedom of speech is contentious. Any individual visiting Saudi Arabia may be detained without explicit charges and denied any chance of communication. The use of the anti-terrorism laws by the Saudi government, therefore, raises issues of continued human rights abuses despite Saudi Arabia’s attempts to improve its global image.
Such cases as that of Ahmed al-Doush shed light on Saudi Arabia’s suppression of individuals suspected of violating the anti-terrorism laws.
The enforcement of these laws across the country is becoming increasingly pervasive. Therefore, it is essential to ensure that the image Saudi Arabia wishes to project does not obscure its ambiguous applications. As long as these measures persist, the country’s modernization will likely remain contentious in light of its internal conditions.
This incident is not the first such incident, as many Saudi activists have received harsh punishments for tweets from the past. Observers refer to this as a strategy of digital oppression employed by authorities to surveil citizens, residents, and even foreigners within the country.
With these practices ongoing, Saudi Arabia faces increasing pressure to enhance its human rights record. This is particularly vital as it aims to attract foreign investments and project itself as an open nation. Yet, the case of Ahmad Al-Douh brings concerning issues regarding the future of freedom of expression in the Kingdom and its implications for international relations.