Saudi Arabia has been making a strict application of two particular laws: the Anti-Cybercrimes Law (2008) and the Penal Law for Crimes of Terrorism and its Financing (2014). Their vague content has been repeatedly used by the Saudi authorities to arrest and detain political dissidents or peaceful protesters arbitrarily. The following cases are brought before the Specialised Criminal Court (SCC), established in 2008, whose accountability has often been questioned. More than a valid judicial instrument, the SCC appears as a political tool that the Saudi government uses to silence the voices of those who want to draw attention to specific situations within the country.
Especially problematic is when the people who are targeted are simply suspected of having relations with dissidents or of publishing social media posts that contravene the laws mentioned above. There are many examples of people being arbitrarily detained and without a fair trial because of these reasons. Still, a recent one deserves attention and provokes discussion about how Saudi Arabia applies these restrictions on freedom of expression. Ahmed al-Doush, a British citizen, was arrested on 31 August while he was with his family at the King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh. The man was given no reason to justify his arrest and could not communicate with his family or consular services for 33 days. Even when he could communicate with UK officials, the reasons for his arrest remained unclear, and he will now face a trial without a proper charge. The latter may relate to a tweet written years ago by al-Doush, in which no reference to Saudi Arabia appears. Another possible allegation could concern al-Doush being the friend of a person whose father is a Saudi dissident.
This is another case of the Saudi authorities using the anti-terrorism laws as a tool to repress freedom of expression and prosecuting a person through arbitrary detention. In this case, the person in question is not even a Saudi citizen. Al-Doush is a citizen from another country who travelled to Saudi Arabia as a tourist and has no history of political activism. This situation contradicts the image Saudi Arabia has been trying to give of itself in recent years, attempting to appear progressive and eager to welcome tourists.
Therefore, if Saudi Arabia’s goal is to attract as many people as possible, this repression of freedom of speech is controversial. Any person travelling to Saudi Arabia could face detention without clear charges and be deprived of any possibility of communication. Thus, the Saudi authorities’ use of anti-terrorism laws highlights ongoing human rights concerns despite the country’s efforts to enhance its global image.
Cases similar to that of Ahmed al-Doush bring attention to the way Saudi Arabia represses those suspected of contravening the anti-terrorism laws. The enforcement of these laws in the country is reaching a high level of pervasiveness. Thus, it is necessary to ensure that the image the country wants to give of itself does not cover their ambiguous use. As long as such measures continue, Saudi Arabia’s modernisation will continue to appear controversial with regard to what happens within it.