Significantly, Fifa emphasises that its human rights evaluations are “not about peremptorily excluding countries based on their general human rights context” and are instead “based on evidence of how effectively bidders intend to address human rights risks connected with a tournament”.
Explaining the Saudi bid’s ‘medium’ risk assessment for human rights, Fifa’s report states that: “The undertaking involved in implementing the various measures outlined in the Human Rights Strategy, particularly in certain areas, could involve significant effort and time…
“However, the considerable work and level of concrete commitment demonstrated by the bid and its key stakeholders, together with the demonstrable rate of progress and the 10-year time horizon, are mitigating factors to consider, whilst there are also significant opportunities for the bid to contribute to wider positive human rights impacts in Saudi Arabia under the umbrella of the country’s Vision 2030.”
Fifa’s report references “the government’s commitment to respecting, protecting and fulfilling internationally recognised human rights in connection with the competition including in the areas of safety and security, labour rights, rights of children, gender equality and non-discrimination, as well as freedom of expression (including press freedom)”.
But the evaluation also “highlights areas where further legal reforms are needed and makes reference to the need for effective enforcement, without which the risk of indecent working conditions could be elevated”.
With regard to diversity and anti-discrimination, the report “notes gaps and reservations in the implementation of relevant international standards, in particular where they are seen to contradict Islamic law… the bidder commits to ensuring a secure and inclusive tournament environment free from discrimination [and]… also commits to reviewing and potentially amending relevant legislation as part of the government’s commitments under international standards.”
Fifa claims “there is a good potential that the tournament could serve as a catalyst for some of the ongoing and future reforms and contribute to positive human rights outcomes for people in Saudi Arabia and the region that go beyond the scope of the tournament itself”.
Earlier this month however, campaign group Amnesty said, external the process to select Saudi Arabia as the 2034 host must be halted, unless major human rights reforms were announced. It claimed that hosting the tournament there would likely lead to severe and widespread rights violations.
Last month Amnesty was also among a group of human rights, labour and fans organisations that criticised, external a “flawed” independent report conducted on behalf of Saudi Arabia that they claim failed to properly assess the treatment of migrant workers.
Fifa and the Saudi bid declined to comment.
Reacting to publication of the report, Amnesty said it was: “An astonishing whitewash of the country’s atrocious human rights record. There are no meaningful commitments that will prevent workers from being exploited, residents from being evicted or activists from being arrested.
“By ignoring the clear evidence of severe human rights risks, Fifa is likely to bear much responsibility for the violations and abuses that will take place over the coming decade.
“Fundamental human rights reforms are urgently required in Saudi Arabia, or the 2034 World Cup will be inevitably tarnished by exploitation, discrimination and repression.”
Campaign group Fair Square said Fifa had “plumbed new depths”.
Fifa has been approached for comment.
