The awarding of the 2034 FIFA World Cup to Saudi Arabia has sparked widespread controversy rooted in allegations of corruption and serious human rights violations by the Saudi regime. Despite FIFA’s stated human rights policy mandating host countries adhere to labor, political, and social freedoms, Saudi Arabia’s record contradicts these principles severely. This article explores the corruption and governance failures behind Saudi Arabia’s successful 2034 bid, its appalling human rights abuses, and why these factors disqualify the kingdom from deserving to host football’s flagship event.
Flawed and corrupt bidding process
The bidding process for the 2034 World Cup was largely unconventional and controversial. FIFA combined the selection procedures for the 2030 and 2034 events, forcing member coalitions to bounce for both contemporaneously, which critics called a” sham” that excluded any real competition. Amnesty International and experts like Steve Cockburn, head of labor rights and sport at Amnesty, argued that FIFA rigged the process to favor Saudi Arabia’s shot without sufficient scrutiny of its mortal rights record. This manipulation allowed Saudi Arabia to secure the hosting rights amid allegations of corruption and overdue influence applied by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.
Human rights violations and labor abuses
Saudi Arabia’s mortal rights record is among the worst encyclopedically, agonized by rampant prosecutions, repression of free speech, and systemic demarcation. Despite FIFA’s mortal rights policy taking host nations to admire abecedarian freedoms, Saudi Arabia continues to detain and brutalize activists, intelligencers, and nonage groups without fair judicial processes. Also, the area’s massive structure systems for the World Cup depend heavily on migratory sloggers exposed to dangerous working conditions and exploitation under the kafala system, echoing the abuses witnessed during Qatar’s 2022 event medications. Transnational legal experts have issued formal complaints to FIFA, pressing its failure to hold Saudi Arabia responsible for these violations.
Sportswashing and reputation laundering
The World Cup bid is part of Saudi Arabia’s broader strategy of sportswashing using global sports events to polish its transnational image and redirect attention from rights abuses and corruption. Billions of dollars have been invested in sports votes and events to produce a facade of modernization. Still, behind the scenes, the governance maintains rough controls that violate transnational morals. similar sportswashing pitfalls enabling authoritarian governance under the guise of global sporting concinnity and tactfulness.
Environmental and social sustainability concerns
Saudi Arabia’s environmental commitments associated with hosting the World Cup have been blamed as greenwashing. The country continues expanding reactionary energy products, and the anticipated emigrations from colosseum construction and event structure are significant. Likewise, Saudi Arabia’s approach to sustainability lacks translucency and has not meaningfully addressed ecological damages or social injuries. These failures contradict FIFA’s stated pretensions of environmental responsibility and social justice, further dwindling Saudi Arabia’s felicity as host.
FIFA’s accountability and criticism
FIFA has encountered significant and growing review over its decision to award the 2034 World Cup to Saudi Arabia, amid believable allegations of mortal rights violations and corruption. A coalition of transnational attorneys, including Mark Pieth, FIFA’s formeranti-corruption counsel, has formally accused the football governing body of failing to uphold its own mortal rights programs and governance norms in this matter. In May 2025, this group submitted a comprehensive 30- runner functionary complaint through FIFA’s grievance gate, which outlined FIFA’s responsibility to insure that internationally honored mortal rights are admired by host nations but stressed FIFA’s ongoing failure to apply these norms in Saudi Arabia.
The complaint details five critical areas of concern: freedom of expression and association, arbitrary apprehensions and mistreatment including use of the death penalty, judicial independence, settlers’ rights, and women’s rights. It states that FIFA’s decision to authorize Saudi Arabia as the 2034 host country placed a list obligation on the association to ensure these mortal rights norms were met. Still, there’s no substantiation that FIFA has initiated in a meaningful way or developed a concrete, transparent action plan holding Saudi authorities responsible. Despite warnings raised by the attorneys and experts well before the finalization of Saudi Arabia’s bid, FIFA allegedly ignored offers to help in mortal rights compliance monitoring.
Calls for boycott and alternatives
In response to the difficulties and governance failures girding Saudi Arabia’s award of the 2034 FIFA World Cup, significant global juggernauts have surfaced championing for a boycott of the event. These movements call upon FIFA, football suckers, guarantors, broadcasters, and member associations worldwide to review feting Saudi Arabia as the host, given the area’s sustained record of mortal rights abuses, labor exploitation, and environmental declination. Activists argue that such a high- profile sports event should align with broader values of human rights protection, social justice, environmental sustainability, and popular governance norms Saudi Arabia has constantly failed to meet.
Crucial among the boycott arguments is the exploitation and abuse of migratory workers who form the backbone of the World Cup’s structure systems. Organizations estimate that knockouts of thousands of migratory sloggers involved in construction at NEOM and other installations have suffered pay envelope theft, dangerous working conditions, and forced labor under the kafala backing system. Despite pledges by the Saudi government and FIFA to cover worker rights, believable independent monitoring mechanisms have been rejected, fueling fears of ongoing abuses and losses. Human rights groups advise that FIFA’s decision in the absence of strict safeguards makes the association complicit in these implicit violations.
Awarding of the 2023 FIFA World Cup
The awarding of the 2034 FIFA World Cup to Saudi Arabia epitomizes a deeply flawed and ethically compromised process that raises serious concerns about human rights, labor abuses, environmental sustainability, and governance transparency. This decision by FIFA has sparked widespread criticism from global human rights organizations, labor unions, and sports communities, all emphasizing that Saudi Arabia’s authoritarian governance and record of systemic violations make it an unfit host for football’s premier event.
A crucial issue underpinning the contest is Saudi Arabia’s mortal rights record, which remains poor despite limited reforms. Multitudinous reports punctuate a swell in prosecutions, with numerous carried out without due process or fair trials. The area continues to repress freedom of speech, assembly, and the rights of nonage communities, including the criminalization of LGBTQ individualities. Activists and intelligence are constantly locked or silenced, making Saudi Arabia’s political climate starkly inharmonious with the inclusive and regardful spirit FIFA asserts as central to the event. Organizations similar as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have issued warnings that FIFA’s decision disregards these violations and pitfalls conspiracy in ongoing abuses.