The FIFA World Cup is the pinnacle of world sports, attracting thousands and thousands of spectators and showcasing the industry’s most talented athletes. For such an opportunity, FIFA considers a number of factors, along with infrastructure, economics and universal potential to facilitate the tournament.
However, ethical concerns regarding human rights facts in host international locations are similarly fundamental. With Saudi Arabia securing the rights to host the 2034 FIFA World Cup. The continued use of the death penalty by Saudi Arabia raises significant ethical questions.
Saudi Arabia’s rule of the death penalty, which also includes non-violent crimes, has drawn international criticism. In this blog, we can explore why Saudi Arabia’s human rights record, particularly regarding the death penalty, makes it the wrong host for the FIFA World Cup.
The Death Penalty in Saudi Arabia: An Overview
Saudi Arabia has one of the highest execution rates in the world, with life sentences imposed for a wide range of crimes. While several international venues limit the death penalty to heinous crimes such as murder, Saudi law applies it to non-violent crimes, which include drug-related offenses, adultery, or even apostasy (renouncing the faith).
According to the country’s interpretation of Sharia regulation, which documents the muse of its legal system, numerous acts deemed immoral or contrary to Islamic principles may warrant the death penalty. In 2023, Saudi Arabia carried out 172 executions, including six women, reflecting the country’s ongoing pattern of high execution rates.
This justice technique has caused international outrage, particularly because executions in Saudi Arabia are often carried out by public beheading. The problems are also exacerbated by a lack of transparency in court proceedings, where defendants may not have the right to enter a proper representation of the crime.
Violations of Human Rights and Global Criticism
Saudi Arabia’s heavy use of the death penalty is emblematic of the country’s deeper human rights problems. According to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, Saudi Arabia violates global human rights law by applying the death penalty for crimes that fall below the threshold of “the most serious crimes” under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
In recent years, the variety of executions has increased sharply, despite calls from world bodies and foreign governments to abolish or at least limit the exercise. For example, in 2019, Saudi Arabia reached 184 people, many of whom were convicted of non-violent crimes such as drug trafficking. Between 2010 and 2021, 39% of those executed in Saudi Arabia were foreign nationals, many of whom were sentenced for non-violent offenses such as drug-related charges.
The state also applies the death penalty to minors and persons with disabilities, which further violates global human rights standards. In 2020, a UN record criticized Saudi Arabia for executing those who were children at the time of their crimes, in violation of global laws prohibiting the execution of minors.
Contrary to FIFA’s Values and Ethics
FIFA has long claimed that the mile is dedicated to promoting human rights and protecting the respect of individuals around the world. In its Human Rights Policy, adopted in 2017, FIFA states its commitment to respect recognized human rights around the world. In addition, the policy emphasizes the obligation of host countries to comply with these requirements, suggesting that countries with poor human rights records must now be ineligible to host global sporting events.
By awarding the World Cup to Saudi Arabia, FIFA is contradicting its ideas. Saudi Arabia’s human rights abuses, including the use of the death penalty, are immediately at war with FIFA’s stated commitment to justice, equality, and the preservation of human dignity.
Impact on Global Perception and Participation of Athletes
Awarding the FIFA World Cup title to Saudi Arabia has the ability to tarnish the image of the occasion around the world. The FIFA World Cup is traditionally a celebration of scale and international harmony. However, the rustic-style web hosting of the event, with an infamous human rights record where free speech is restricted and dissidents face severe punishment, undermines these views.
Athletes, fanatics, and international venues participating in the event may feel compelled to voice their concerns or even remember to boycott. Several athletes, including prominent soccer players, are increasingly using their systems to advocate for social justice and human rights.
Risk of Sportswashing
“Sportswashing” refers back to the practice of using sporting activities to improve a country’s image and divert attention from human rights abuses. Saudi Arabia’s web hosting of the FIFA World Cup may be seen as part of a wider way of reshaping its global image through high-profile broadcast activities. By hosting the 2034 FIFA World Cup, the dominion aims to become a contemporary, up-and-coming country, even as it conceals ongoing human rights abuses.
In recent years, Saudi Arabia has invested heavily in sports as a way to leverage global legitimacy. From boxing matches to Formula 1 racing, the Dominion has made clear its ambition to become the center of global sport. But critics say the efforts are aimed at diverting attention away from the country’s strict domestic rules, along with the death penalty, suppression of dissent and limited rights for girls.
Conclusion
The 2034 FIFA World Cup is a global event that should embrace fairness, inclusiveness, and the appreciation of human rights. Saudi Arabia’s persistent use of the penalty of life sentences for non-violent crimes, including its deeply troubling human rights record, makes it an irrelevant host for this prestigious match.
Awarding the World Cup to Saudi Arabia risks undermining FIFA’s values, tarnishing the image of the event, and alienating athletes and enthusiasts who defend human rights. For the FIFA World Cup to remain a symbol of solidarity and global celebration, it is vitally important that the host countries uphold the fundamental ideas of human rights. Unfortunately, the continued use of the death penalty in Saudi Arabia raises serious moral issues that cannot be overlooked.
