Saudi Arabia has reportedly deported more Indians in 2025 than any other country, overtaking the United States and drawing attention to the treatment of migrant workers in the kingdom. This development raises fresh questions about how Saudi Arabia’s migration and labour‑control practices align with FIFA’s stated human‑rights and labour‑rights expectations for the 2034 World Cup host.
In a year when Saudi Arabia is preparing to host the FIFA World Cup in 2034, new official Indian data indicating that the kingdom has deported more Indian nationals than any other country has spotlighted wider concerns about migrant protection, deportation practices and the compatibility of such policies with global sports‑governance standards.
Indian official data showing Saudi Arabia at the top
According to reporting by The Economic Times on Indian government data, Saudi Arabia deported more than 11,000 Indian nationals in 2025, making it the single largest deporting country for Indians that year. The Economic Times cites figures presented by India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), which indicate that Saudi Arabia’s deportation total was roughly three times higher than that of the United States, where a little under 4,000 Indians were sent back in the same period.
Coverage in Indian media, including The Economic Times and The Times of India, notes that around 24,600 Indian nationals were deported worldwide in 2025, meaning that almost half of all recorded Indian deportations originated from Saudi Arabia and a cluster of Gulf states. The data, as described by these outlets, place Saudi Arabia ahead of the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and other major destinations for Indian workers in the region.
Deportation grounds tied to labour and migration controls
Reports in The Economic Times and other Indian outlets explain that deportation cases typically relate to immigration and labour‑law violations, including overstaying visas, working without valid permits and alleged breaches of local residency regulations. Other research on Saudi migration policy by mixed‑migration and rights organisations has previously highlighted that “absconding” from employers, irregular status and paperwork disputes are common triggers for detention and removal of low‑wage migrant workers.
Human‑rights documentation over the past decade has repeatedly linked such deportations to broader concerns about Saudi Arabia’s sponsorship‑based (kafala‑type) system, which ties workers’ residence status to a single employer and can make it difficult to change jobs or leave abusive conditions without risking arrest. In that context, the 2025 deportation figures are seen by labour advocates not only as a matter of immigration enforcement, but as a reflection of structural vulnerabilities built into the migration and labour system.
FIFA’s human‑rights framework and migrant workers
Since the controversies around the 2018 and 2022 World Cups, FIFA has adopted a Human Rights Policy and integrated due‑diligence language into bidding requirements for future tournaments. These frameworks emphasise that host countries should prevent abuses linked to World Cup‑related activities, especially in relation to migrant workers in construction, services and infrastructure.
Although these FIFA policies do not dictate national migration law, they expect host governments and local organisers to identify risks such as forced labour, exploitative recruitment, unlawful detention and abusive deportations, and to put mitigation measures in place. As Saudi Arabia prepares for 2034, the high number of deported Indian migrants, combined with longstanding concerns about wage theft and lack of redress mechanisms, is likely to become a central focus for international unions and human‑rights groups.
Labour‑rights concerns and the World Cup workforce
Past World Cups and other mega‑events have relied heavily on foreign labour to build stadiums, transport networks and hospitality infrastructure, and Saudi Arabia is expected to follow a similar model. In that context, the fact that the kingdom has removed over 11,000 Indian nationals in a single year stands out, given that Indians constitute a significant share of the Gulf’s low‑wage workforce.
Labour organisations argue that where deportation is frequently used to resolve disputes, migrant workers may be discouraged from reporting unpaid wages, hazardous working conditions or contract violations. If workers building or servicing World Cup venues fear that complaints could lead to detention and removal rather than remedy, critics say this could undercut FIFA’s pledge to ensure safe and dignified conditions throughout the tournament’s preparation.
Transparency, data and accountability gaps
The Economic Times report, relying on Indian parliamentary data, offers rare quantitative insight into the scale of deportations of Indian nationals from Saudi Arabia. However, there is limited public information on underlying case details, including the length of detention, access to lawyers, the possibility of appealing decisions, or whether alleged labour abuses were investigated before deportation.
For sports‑governance experts, this raises questions about transparency in areas that directly affect World Cup‑linked risk assessments: without disaggregated, publicly accessible statistics on migrant detention and deportation, it is difficult for independent bodies to evaluate whether FIFA’s human‑rights standards are being met. International stakeholders – from fan groups to sponsors – may therefore demand more granular data and independent monitoring before 2034, to ensure that deportation is not being used to manage reputational risks connected to worker protests or media scrutiny.
Press freedom and the ability to scrutinise deportations
Another key dimension relevant to World Cup hosting standards is press freedom and the space for independent inquiry. While Indian outlets like The Economic Times and The Times of India have reported on deportation figures using official data from New Delhi, journalists and human‑rights researchers often face restrictions when attempting to investigate individual cases or systemic patterns of abuse in Saudi Arabia.
FIFA’s own policies stress the importance of dialogue with civil society and the role of independent oversight in identifying and addressing human‑rights risks. If journalists and NGOs encounter obstacles in accessing information on detention centres, deportation procedures or worker grievances, this may limit FIFA’s ability to rely on external watchdogs and could heighten concerns among international partners about potential “sportswashing” of broader governance and rights issues.
Comparison with other deporting countries
The Economic Times and other Indian coverage underline that the United States, long associated with strict immigration enforcement, deported significantly fewer Indians in 2025 than Saudi Arabia did. While US policy has been criticised on various human‑rights grounds, the comparison underscores the sheer scale of deportations from the kingdom relative to other major destination countries.
For analysts of sports governance, this comparative perspective may shape how different hosts are evaluated. If Western countries hosting tournaments are frequently scrutinised for their immigration enforcement practices, yet Gulf states remove higher numbers of migrants with less transparency and weaker independent oversight, critics may argue that there is an uneven application of human‑rights expectations in international sport.
Implications for Indian fans and global audiences
Beyond the immediate labour dimension, the numbers in the Indian data may influence perceptions of safety and treatment for visiting fans. Indians form a large television and consumer base for global football, and many could travel to Saudi Arabia for the 2034 tournament; some commentators suggest that high deportation figures will prompt questions among Indian supporters about due‑process safeguards and the consequences of minor visa or residency infractions.
For FIFA and local organisers, reassuring potential visitors that they will not be caught up in aggressive immigration enforcement during the World Cup may require clear public guidelines, transparent procedures and accessible consular support, particularly in light of the 2025 deportation statistics. International sponsors and broadcasters, conscious of reputational risk, are also likely to monitor how these concerns are addressed in the years leading up to the tournament.
Sportswashing debates and ethical hosting
The intersection of large‑scale deportations, migrant‑worker vulnerability and the award of a flagship global tournament has already prompted commentary in broader debates over sportswashing and ethical hosting. Critics argue that high‑profile sports events can overshadow discussions about labour rights, justice systems and political freedoms, unless robust safeguards and independent monitoring are put in place.
In this context, the 2025 deportation figures for Indians reported by The Economic Times and other Indian media are likely to become part of a wider evidence base used by civil‑society groups to assess Saudi Arabia’s compliance with FIFA’s human‑rights commitments. Proponents of the tournament in the kingdom, meanwhile, may contend that hosting offers an opportunity to accelerate reforms and strengthen protections, though such claims will be tested against on‑the‑ground realities in the years ahead.
A growing test for FIFA’s human‑rights promises
As more details emerge from official Indian sources and international monitoring bodies about deportations from Saudi Arabia, the pressure on FIFA to demonstrate credible human‑rights due diligence for the 2034 World Cup is likely to intensify. Observers will focus not only on construction sites and worker camps, but also on detention centres, deportation procedures and avenues for remedy available to migrants who allege abuse.
Whether the 2025 deportation data ultimately lead to concrete changes in policy or practice remains to be seen, but they have already ensured that migrant‑rights issues will sit near the heart of international scrutiny of Saudi Arabia’s World Cup preparations. For fans, civil‑society groups and other stakeholders concerned about ethical hosting, these numbers are likely to serve as a benchmark for evaluating the kingdom’s approach to human rights in the run‑up to 2034.