Why Civil Disputes Are Treated As Migration Crimes In Saudi Arabia?

In Saudi Arabia, labour disputes between migrant workers and their employers are frequently treated not as civil contractual issues but as migration violations, leading to arbitrary detention and deportation. This harsh reality disproportionately affects vulnerable groups, including African women and boys working as domestic workers, who often find themselves trapped in prolonged detention centers under the pretext of awaiting government-issued “exit permits.” These workers experience conditions akin to imprisonment, stripped of the freedom to leave at will.

Central to this issue is Saudi Arabia’s Kafala (sponsorship) system, which legally binds a migrant worker’s residency and legal status to their employer. Employers wield extensive control, including the power to grant or deny exit permits, which migrants need to leave the country. This system enables employers to unilaterally cancel workers’ residency and contracts, rendering workers undocumented if they can not find a new sponsor. It also restricts workers’ mobility and ability to change jobs, often requiring employer consent except in limited cases under recent reforms. Furthermore, many workers, especially domestic workers, remain largely excluded from labour law reforms, limiting their access to legal protections.

Under Saudi law, when a labour dispute arises, employers can terminate the worker’s sponsorship. Without a valid sponsor, the worker’s residency becomes illegal, exposing them to detention and deportation. This conflation of civil labour disputes with immigration violations effectively criminalizes what should be civil contractual disagreements. Workers involved in disputes face immediate risk of being labelled as “absconding” or violating residency rules, leading to detention. Deportation is often carried out without fair hearings or proper dispute resolution mechanisms, denying workers due process. Many endure prolonged detention in migration centers while awaiting exit permits, which can take months, exacerbating their vulnerability.

This practice is widely condemned under international law. International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions No. 97 and No. 143 protects migrant workers’ rights to fair treatment, access to justice, and due process. Forced deportations without fair hearings violate these protections. Additionally, UN human rights frameworks guarantee the right to a fair hearing and effective remedies before deportation or punishment is enforced. The ILO explicitly condemns the use of deportation as a tool to suppress legitimate labour claims and denies migrant workers access to justice.

Saudi Arabia has introduced reforms, such as the Labour Reform Initiative (LRI), allowing some migrant workers to change jobs and leave without employer permission after a year. However, these reforms exclude domestic workers and other vulnerable groups, who remain under the strictest controls. Employers still have the power to issue exit visas arbitrarily, forcing workers to leave within 60 days and face deportation if they do not comply. Moreover, the reforms fail to provide timely and accessible dispute resolution, making it difficult for workers to contest unfair deportations.

The treatment of civil labour disputes as migration crimes in Saudi Arabia stems from the structural power imbalance imposed by the Kafala system and restrictive immigration laws. This leads to widespread arbitrary detention and deportation of migrant workers without fair hearings, violating international labour and human rights standards. Genuine reform requires dismantling these systemic controls, ensuring fair dispute resolution, and protecting all migrant workers equally under the law.

This article draws on documented legal frameworks and reports highlighting the ongoing exploitation and legal challenges faced by migrant workers in Saudi Arabia, calling for urgent international and domestic action to uphold justice and human dignity.