I wrote recently about the Kafkaesque rules designed to restrict civil society activity in Bahrain, and I mentioned in passing that numerous Arab countries have similar laws.

Saudi Arabia, as might be expected, is one that keeps a firm grip on civil society organisations (CSOs) though it doesn't have a specific law for this purpose – yet. A law has been promised (or perhaps I should say threatened, because if it ever materialises it will probably be just as restrictive as that in Bahrain). 

In the meantime, some CSOs (the sort the authorities approve of) operate under licences, while others exist without licences in a legal limbo, unable to raise funds, organise events or have their own premises to hold meetings.

Ahmed al-Omran explains:

"The state enjoys a near-complete monopoly over the public sphere. Political parties and labour unions are illegal, and the few civil society organisations that are allowed to operate do so under significant state-imposed restrictions. The Saudi government does not believe in a strong role for civil society and thus CSOs’ capacity to bring about change in Saudi Arabia is very limited.

"According to government statistics, over six hundred associations are licensed to operate in Saudi Arabia. In addition to charitable and professional associations, approved CSOs usually enjoy the backing of members of the royal family or prominent merchant families. Given the strict restrictions, it is almost impossible to establish a civil society organisation without the support of a royal family member. 

"Saudi activists who wish to establish an organisation have to cooperate with the state, and permission is only granted to organisations whose goals do not threaten the status quo, that advocate conservative reforms, or are simply apolitical."

In a post on his Riyadh Bureau blog, Omran discusses the recent case of the Adala Center for Human Rights which is based in Qatif. Adala had applied for a licence, and decided to sue the Ministry of Social Affairs when it was refused.

Not surprisingly, the Administrative Court in Damman found in favour of the ministry but the reasons given by the three judges make interesting reading and, once again, bring Kafka to mind. (The original Arabic text of the judgment is here, with an English translation here).

The court accepted the ministry's argument that it is only empowered to license charities, and that Adala is "a rights centre and not a charity organisation". 

In most countries running a rights centre would be considered a charitable activity and even the Saudi ministry's definition of a charity includes providing "humanitarian services without having profitable goals", but both the court and the ministry seem to have interpreted it very narrowly.

That may appear unnecessarily obstructive, but another part of the judgment is particularly alarming.

Adala's statement of aims refers to the principles and standards of international humanitarian law, along with "regional charters" and local Saudi laws that relate to human rights. The judges were unhappy with this, "since it is evidently known that many placed ordinances do not comply with the Islamic Shari'a", and they ruled that Adala's aims violate Article 7 of Saudi Arabia's Basic Lawwhich states:

"Government in Saudi Arabia derives power from the Holy Quran and the Prophet's tradition."

    
Posted by Brian Whitaker
Friday, 2 August 2013