The Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR) reviewed another case of abuse of power by influential figures against a Saudi business investor, something that is often happening since the appointment by King Salman of Mohammed bin Salman as Crown Prince on 21 June 2017.

The review is focused on the case of Saudi investor Zaid Asbaih which brings to attention to the absent rule of law in protecting businesspeople and investors against powerful figures despite the involvement of Saudi courts, institutions and local human rights organisations. It serves as a bitter reminder of the November 2017 purge incident against influential businessmen and consultant figures.

Authorities detained leading businessmen at a luxury hotel, and forced them to transfer their assets. Affected individuals were reportedly tortured and threatened with imprisonment and travel bans if they refused the transfer.

The most concerning part is that there was no transparency or access to legal representation during the purge. Most of the affected individuals remained under unlawful travel bans or are still imprisoned.

The case of Asbaih, though have been reviewed to no avail in Saudi courts, was another example of abuse of power by his partner, Abdullah Nasser Al-Shathri. The latter is a powerful business figures with strong ties to the Royal Court and the legal system through his family members and connections.

 In May 2016, Asbaih, as an investor, sought to develop a partnership with Al-Shathri to develop a residential/ commercial project named Diriyah Hills compound (DHC) in the famous Diriyah are, and followed all the legal laws and regulations. In March 2020, the project started to earn revenues and good reputation in the field. However, Asbaih found himself kicked out of his project and found his work documents seized by his partner, despite that being a clear preach of contractual terms.

He resolved to courts in which, he was repeatedly dismissed or ignored by various judges once they learn of the identity of his business partner. Eventually he lost his millions in investment and threatened to be “learnt a lesson” if he kept on raising the case in different legal and administrative institutions.

After being unable to seek justice through the legal and administrative channels inside Saudi Arabia, Asbaih has left the country and sought protection in another country. We, at GCHR, have reviewed the legal documentations and we were able to verify the bias in courts’ decision to favor his powerful opponent. After years of failed litigations, the Supreme Judicial Council, didn’t hold anyone accountable despite their evident failure to apply the Saudi laws and regulations.

In hopes of getting justice, Mr. Asbaih, went to social media, after departing outside Saudi Arabia, and started exposing the abuse of power in the legal and administrative systems. He is now facing a great risk of retribution by the Saudi authorities similar to cases of other people who serve long imprisonment and other punishment for speaking online about their grievances in the absence of justice. Saudi authorities have a long history of politically-motivated persecution of online critics including those living abroad; the case of the prominent journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, who was killed outside of Saudi Arabia is one case in point.

Investors facing risk in Saudi Arabia

Cases as such demonstrate a wide scale corruption using political ties to impeded access to justice. Saudi Arabia is actively transforming its economy under vision 2030 and encouraging investment is a key tenure of the vision. Without access to justice, clear measures of protecting investors rights against powerful figures and abuse of power, vision 2030 may not reach its objective, let alone lose the credibility of the legal system by investors who are still facing a considerable risk in the Kingdom.

Recommendations

GCHR calls on Saudi authorities to:

1. Fairly and impartially investigate the case and holding all those involved in impeding access to justice accountable;
2. Ensure that there are legal and administrative path to justice that is mostly immune from abuse of power by powerful figures;
3. Allow citizens to publicly expose the documented corruption of powerful figures without fear of retribution;
4. Provide effective remedies and compensations for victims of judicial abuse to restore trust in the judiciary.