Many of us agree that the Saudi judicial system is not always responsive to our needs, especially in the area of domestic issues. But there are cases that demonstrate that despite flaws in the system, the average Saudi can be heard and the government can and will respond.
Take the case of the Board of Grievances, the administrative court that handles disputes that arise between citizens and the government or employers. As an administrative court, the Board of Grievances is often overlooked as a body that can fairly dispense justice, yet it is often the first recourse for Saudi citizens who believe the government or their employer has wronged them. And rulings issued by the board often do not side with those citizens.
Still, there are enough examples that the board is an effective resource that gives heart to Saudis who want to have confidence in their government. A recent dispute surfaced in which the Ministry of Interior rejected a security man’s plea to receive the full benefits he believed he was entitled to after getting injured during a security operation involving extremists.
The ministry determined that victims of terrorism — those military, police and security officers — injured in the line of duty while protecting the country can only receive full benefits if it’s determined that their injuries reached or exceeded 60 percent. That means that government employees must be significantly injured to the point that they cannot carry out their duties effectively.
Once it’s been determined that the extent of their injuries is 60 percent or worse, they are entitled to receive up to SR100,000 in compensation, promotion to the next higher rank and receive the coveted badge of honor.
The security man disputed the criteria and took his grievance to the board in Abha. After hearing evidence, the board ruled the individual was entitled to the Ministry of Interior’s full benefits although his injuries were deemed 30 percent. Further, the board ruled that individuals whose injuries amounted to less than 30 percent were also entitled to full compensation. The compensation is also retroactive to the time the injury occurred, which allows an increase in benefits.
The Interior Ministry agreed with the ruling. Not only does the decision cover the individual who brought his case to the board, but also all individuals who suffered similar injuries while fighting terrorism on the job.
This is an important case for Saudis because it shows that any ministry does not necessarily have the final word in disputes with its employees or the average citizen. The ruling shows that Saudis have a resource that allows them to appeal decisions that they believe are not in their best interest. Justice can prevail, even if it means challenging one of the most powerful ministries in the Kingdom. It is evident that no individual and no government body are above the law. It also demonstrates that the Interior Ministry does not abuse its authority by complying with the board’s order.
The weaknesses in our judicial system remain the lack of codified laws and lack of transparency. Tribal justice still prevails in domestic courts and gender bias is still a significant problem for half of the Saudi population. But the recent case involving the Interior Ministry and its employee gives us hope that improvements in the system will continue until we have 100 percent confidence in the courts that dispense justice.
—
Email: [email protected]
