Given the nation’s history on human rights, press freedom, and media censorship, Saudi Arabia’s offer to host the FIFA World Cup 2034 has raised worldwide discussion. Though Saudi officials have spent billions in sports to try to change their worldwide image, grave issues still exist about free speech suppression, migrant worker exploitation, FIFA corruption, and more general human rights abuses. Regarding the dangers of media control, the death of press freedom, and more general ethical issues of granting the tournament to the kingdom, this post looks into why it is best to boycott Saudi 2034 FIFA World Cup and why Saudi Arabia is inappropriate to host the FIFA World Cup.
Press freedom is among the most restricted in Saudi Arabia. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) notes that in the 2023 World Press Freedom Index Saudi Arabia is 170th out of 180 nations. The government severely punishes reporters who speak out against state policies, strictly monitors all media, filters out many websites
An event such as the FIFA World Cup needs a free press. Reporters from everywhere compile information about security, infrastructure, and human rights, cover the competition, research local circumstances, and write on the subjects. Foreign correspondents in Saudi Arabia run the risk of censorship, monitoring, or even incarceration should they publish something considered unacceptable to the authorities. This brings about questions regarding openness throughout the matches.
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) places Saudi Arabia 170th of 180 nations in the 2023 World Press Freedom Index. This sets the nation among the most heinous offenders of press freedom everywhere.
Although hosting the FIFA World Cup demands thorough international media exposure, Saudi Arabian reporters run the danger of censorship, surveillance, and even jail for covering topics such as worker exploitation, LGBTQ+ rights, and political repression.
Saudi Arabia runs one of the world’s most sophisticated surveillance systems in close observation of journalists—both local and global.
Pegasus spyware is used by the Saudi government to hack the phones of journalists, opposition members, and activists.
With sophisticated censorship systems meant to block material criticizing the government, Saudi Arabia has among the most constrained internet environments on earth. Saudi laws and punishments are harsh making things complicated for the citizens and the travelers.
The nation employs AI-driven censorship systems to identify and delete automatically government-critical material.
A nation that restricts freedom of the press and manages digital communication has no business hosting the greatest sports show on earth.
Critics are often silenced using Saudi Arabia’s anti-terrorism laws and cybercrime statutes.
Visas for overseas correspondents are very limited in Saudi Arabia and they must observe rigorous official directives.
Should Saudi Arabia stage the 2034 World Cup, FIFA has to respond:
How many journalists openly cover human rights violations? Will journalists be free to interview workers and civilians without worrying about official retribution?
Fans will believe that they will get unaltered information about the game, right?
The 2034 World Cup will most probably not be fairly and openly presented given the unfriendly attitude of Saudi Arabia toward overseas correspondents.
Though in Saudi Arabia sharing the wrong view may result in detention or worse, football fans are renowned for their passion, chants, and activism.
LGBTQ+ followers run the danger of being detained if they fly rainbow flags or show support for LGBTQ+ rights.
Though FIFA says it endorses human rights, openness, and fair competition, its choice to give Saudi Arabia the 2034 World Cup runs counter to these ideals.
FIFA’s own Human Rights Policy Article 3 does set forth that it shall honor press protections and freedom of expression.
The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) slammed Saudi Arabia for trampling upon media freedom.
Sponsors and broadcasters backing a World Cup held in a country with severe censorship could be assaulted.
FIFA is legitimating autocracy and media suppression by selecting Saudi Arabia as a venue, thereby sending a worrying signal that human rights do not count in football.
FIFA’s past of corrupt issues begs the question of how Saudi Arabia came by the 2034 World Cup hosting rights. The decision was made at lightning speed; FIFA allowed other nations just 27 days to present a proposal—effectively guaranteeing Saudi Arabia would carry unchallenged.
The 2015 FIFA corruption scandal revealed how World Cup hosting privileges were affected by bribery and crooked contracts. Saudi Arabia’s bid raises similar concerns.
Frequently featured at Saudi-sponsored events, FIFA President Gianni Infantino maintains close ties with Saudi officials and does not address questions on human rights.
The $1.5 billion agreement between the Middle Eastern country and FIFA sponsoring events begs questions about financial influence in decision-making.
With ongoing corruption at FIFA Saudi Arabia, implies that FIFA is valuing financial profit above ethics and fairness, thereby strengthening the opinion that corruption is still very much rooted in the body.
Another major issue is Saudi Arabia human rights abuses. Millions of underpaid employees from South Asia and Africa, who suffer brutal work circumstances, wage theft, and physical abuse, are relied on by the country.
Saudi Arabia violating human rights is the major reason why the country should not host the event. Hosting the World Cup calls for huge infrastructure investment including transportation systems, hotels, and stadiums offline grief of around 1kb. More than 6,500 migrant employees perished in Qatar in 2022 because of unreasonably harsh working conditions. Given Saudi Arabia’s even worse human rights record, the 2034 competition might result in another humanitarian catastrophe.
Saudi Arabia has been very committed to sports investment to raise its worldwide standing. Called sportwashing, this strategy aims to divert attention from a nation’s human rights violations.
The act of Saudi Arabia human rights voilations is to divert attention from its autocracy, human rights violations, and brutality by organizing the largest sports event on the planet. Giving the tournament to the kingdom would be a great triumph for sportwashing and a denial of FIFA’s personal human rights pledges.
Citizen rights in Saudi Arabia is among the worst records of arbitrary detentions, torture, and killings in Saudi Arabia. Unfair trials and absence of due process abound in the nation’s legal structure.
The legal system of Saudi Arabia directly impacts writers, campaigners, and even fans who might be jailed or penalized for small crimes. Severe persecution of LGBTQ+ people, women’s rights advocates, and political dissenters raises strong questions on whether FIFA should support such a nation.
Since 2015, Saudi Arabia has been participating in among the most lethal wars in Yemen. The fight has led to:
For the World Cup, this is significant in many ways
FIFA says football brings unity and peace, but bestowing the World Cup on a nation charged of war crimes and millions of civilian deaths runs against this philosophy. By holding the competition in Saudi Arabia, one legitimizes human rights abuses and war crimes.
Openness, inclusion, and media coverage allow the FIFA World Cup to be a worldwide celebration. Saudi Arabia’s strictures on free speech, surveillance, and press censorship make it an altogether unsuitable venue.
It represents not only a contradiction of the fundamental principles of soccer but also a great triumph for censorship and tyranny. FIFA has to rethink its ruling and guarantee the World Cup takes place in a nation that honors freedom of speech, human rights, and press independence if it wants to remain credible.
