RIYADH, 28 September 2006 — The hearing in the case of Indian internist Dr. Ganesh Pande, scheduled for Sept. 24, was re-scheduled once again for a week on the ground that the Higher Labor Committee wanted the sponsor to produce commercial registration documents proving his ownership of Mustawsaf Olaya Polyclinic.
Dr. Pande told Arab News that his sponsor, Mohammed ibn Dayel Al-Shamrani, was asked to prove his bona fides as the owner of the clinic.
“It is sad that even after three years these basic issues remain unsettled and the case is being adjourned repeatedly on flimsy grounds,” said the doctor. “Mine is an open-and-shut case. The facts have been well documented and need no clarification. I fail to understand why it is being dragged on indefinitely.”
Dr. Pande expressed his gratitude to Khaled Almaeena, editor in chief of Arab News, for his personal interest in the matter, which he brought to the attention of Labor Minister Ghazi Al-Gosaibi. He hoped that justice would be done in his case expeditiously, as in the recent case of a Saudi employee against his sponsor.
Dr. Pande said that when he asked his lawyer, Lotfi Madani, whether the members of the committee are aware that his case has been engaging the attention of the media, the latter told him that the committee is indifferent to such publicity. “When I asked him how long the trial could drag on, my lawyer said he has no idea,” he said.
Madani said the system is flawed because it allowed for unnecessary delays.
“The labor committee could always say that it is studying the case when legal disputes drag on for years,” he said. “I don’t see any hope of justice in such a situation.”
His case has been pending in the Higher Labor Committee despite the intervention of the Riyadh governorate, several appeals by the Indian ambassador, including personal visits to the Labor Ministry.
What has caused a stalemate in his case is that even the new labor law that went into effect in April is silent on the issue of the continued absence of the Saudi sponsor at court hearings. “I am lucky this time that my case has been postponed only by one week,” said Dr. Pande. “Otherwise, it is normal to adjourn cases by three months or more. That’s how it has been pending for over three years now.”
In the meantime, Dr. Pande remains a virtual prisoner of his sponsor, since his iqama (work residency permit) was forcibly renewed by the order of the Riyadh governor for one year. However, it is due to lapse in five months.
“If, God forbid, there is an emergency, it means I shall again be at the mercy of my sponsor,” said the doctor.
According to the doctor, even though he has a letter from the governor authorizing him to work anywhere until his problem is solved, he is in a very difficult situation.
“It means I cannot use my bank account, buy a car, or visit any place where an introduction letter is needed,” he said.
In this context, Almaeena has drawn the attention of in his signed article published in Al-Eqtisadiah Arabic daily.
In an open letter to Al-Gosaibi, Almaeena highlighted Dr. Pande’s case and pointed out that even the National Society for Human Rights (NSHR) has pleaded its inability to take up the matter. As a result, the Indian doctor lost SR178,000 ($47,466) when he resigned from the polyclinic where he had been working for 17 years.
According to Ismael S. Nazer, a Dammam-based attorney, if the employer is properly served with legal summons to appear in court, then the Labor Court can seek the help of police to produce him in court.
