The following is based on a communication sent by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Government of Saudi Arabia on 15 December 2025. The communication remained confidential for 60 days before being made public, giving the Government time to reply. The Government replied on 29 January 2026, which is currently being translated and will be posted on the UN Special Procedures communications database.
This is a shorter version of the original communication.
BACKGROUND
Topic: the retrial and a new long-term prison sentence imposed against human rights defender Mr. Mohammed Saleh al-Bajadi with serious concerns about the violation of due process.
Mr. Mohammed Saleh al-Bajadi is a founding member of the now-banned ACPRA, a human rights organization that documented human rights violations, filed lawsuits against the Ministry of Interior and reported violations to the UN Human Rights Council and Special Procedures. He had also founded the “Forum for Cultural Debates”, a group that used to meet weekly to discuss the promotion of human rights. Mr. al-Bajadi was the subject of five previous communications since 2014 from various Special Procedures mandate holders dated 20 May 2021 (SAU 6/2021); 14 June 2018 (SAU 7/2018); 22 December 2017 (SAU 12/2017); 1 July 2016 (SAU 4/2016); 3 October 2014 (SAU 11/2014). We thank the Government for the response to the communications of SAU 6/2021, SAU 12/2017 and SAU 4/2016. However, we regret that no response has been transmitted to the other communications. Other detained ACPRA human rights defenders were also the subject of numerous communications with the Saudi Government.
Mr. al-Bajadi was the subject of opinion No. 38/2015 adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its seventy-third session (September 2015). In its opinion, the Working Group established that his detention was arbitrary because it was based on the peaceful exercise of his legitimate rights to freedom of expression and peaceful association, and that it formed a part of a continued persecution and crackdown on human rights activists in Saudi Arabia (opinion No. 38/2015 issued on 4 September 2015). According to the Working Group, his detention is arbitrary and falls under categories II and III.
A report by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders presented to the UN General Assembly at its 76th Session on 14 October 2021 cited Saudi Arabia as one of the States where human rights defenders had been sentenced to 10 years or more in prison in connection to their peaceful human rights work.[1]
ALLEGATIONS
Background information:
On 21 March 2011, Mr. al-Bajadi was arrested after he attended a peaceful protest outside the Ministry of interior in Riyadh. He was placed in solitary confinement for four months. His trial began in August 2011. It is alleged that his trial was secret as neither the charges against him, nor his sentence were made public. Furthermore, his legal defence team was denied access to him and informed that their right to represent him is not recognized by the court. His lawyers and family were neither informed about the hearings nor allowed to attend them.
On 10 April 2012, the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) in Riyadh, which tries terrorism-related cases, sentenced him to eight years in prison, with four years suspended, followed by a five-year travel ban. The Court found Mr. al-Bajadi guilty of 1) participating in the establishment of an unlicensed organization; 2) harming the image of the state through the media; 3) calling on the families of political detainees to protest and hold sit-ins; 4) contesting the independence of the judiciary and 5) having banned books in his possession. Mr. al-Bajadi and his legal representative were unaware that the Court of Appeal had rejected the sentence handed down by the SCC and sent the case back to the same court for re-trial.
Mr. al-Bajadi’s second trial started on 15 August 2013. On this occasion, Mr. al-Bajadi was not informed of this re-trial until prison security guards asked him to go to court to receive a copy of his first sentence. He refused to do so in protest at the unfairness of his trial and the secrecy surrounding it. Later, he discovered that the court summons was for the re-trial of his first hearing, based on the Court of Appeal’s order, not in a new case but on the same five charges, cited above. He was sentenced in 2015 to ten years in prison, with five years suspended, and a four-year travel ban.
On 29 November 2015, Mr. al-Bajadi was transferred, ordered by an administrative decision, to the Mohamed bin-Nayef Centre for Counselling and Care, a rehabilitation centre for those following “devious thoughts” before their release.
On 21 April 2016, he was released, after more than five years in detention including several months in solitary confinement. Before his release, Mr. al-Bajadi was reportedly asked to pledge to stop his activism and refrain from communication with foreign organisations or media. In a tweet on 26 October 2016, he wrote that he would stop participating on all social media accounts for “reasons that are not unknown to you.”
Mr. al-Bajadi’s current case:
On 24 May 2018, Mr. al-Bajadi was arrested during a security crackdown on campaigners for women’s rights. He was arrested from his home by State Security officers and taken to an unknown location. He was not tried and was ordered to serve the five years of suspension of his previous prison sentence, handed down in 2015. He was held in Buraydah Prison.
He was due to be released in May 2023 but was instead kept in detention in Buraydah Prison.
On 27 October 2025, Mt. al-Bajadi was subjected to a trial by the Specialised Criminal Court and sentenced to another 25 years in prison. He had no access to a lawyer and the charges have not been made public. It was not known what he was charged with by the time of writing of this communication. He is currently held in Buraydah Prison.
CONCERNS
In the communication, we express our utmost concern at the arbitrary detention, judicial harassment and disproportionally harsh sentencing under the guise of national security and counter-terrorism legislation in relation to Mr. al-Bajadi for the legitimate exercise of his rights to freedom of peaceful assembly, association and expression and his right to participate in public affairs. We remind the Government of Saudi Arabia that the criminalization of the legitimate defence of the human rights of others is incompatible with international human rights law. We are also concerned by the multiple allegations indicating that fair trial standards may have been breached during the several trial proceedings against Mr. al-Bajadi.
We remind the Saudi Government that the serious violation of due process to Mr. al-Bajadi contraveneshis right not to be arbitrarily detained as well as his right to a fair trial. Mr. al-Bajadi was reportedly not given access to a lawyer of his choosing, tried on the basis of secret evidence and information about his trial was not made public. Furthermore, at the time of his arrest, he was initially denied access to legal counsel, was not informed of the charges against him, and his hearings were held behind closed doors without apparent justification. Allegations also indicate that he was subjected to solitary confinement.
With regard to the Specialized Criminal Court, we recall that the former Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism in his country visit to Saudi Arabia,[2] the Committee against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment[3] and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention[4] have all expressed concerns that this Court, which was established in 2008 to try cases of terrorism, is insufficiently independent of the Ministry of the Interior. As a court of exception, the Specialized Criminal Court is not composed of independent judges but of a panel appointed by the Ministry of the Interior.
Concerns regarding the 2017 Law on Combatting Crimes of Terrorism and its Financing have been expressed by various Special Procedures mandate holders, as well as by the former Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism in his country visit report to Saudi Arabia. On every occasion, it was noted that several provisions of the Law appear to be incompatible with Saudi Arabia’s obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), reflecting customary international law. These concerns relate, among others, to the broad and vague definition of terrorism that encompasses non-violent acts, the criminalisation of freedom of expression, violations of fair trial guarantees, and the expanded application of the death penalty.
We express our deep concern regarding the imposition of a travel ban, the requirement to pledge to cease all activism and refrain from any communication with foreign organizations or media, as well as the obligation to remain in a so-called “rehabilitation” center. If such measures are applied outside a clear legal framework and without independent judicial oversight, they raise significant risks of arbitrariness and disproportionate interference with fundamental rights. Even when adopted by a judicial decision, they must comply with international human rights standards, including legality, necessity, proportionality, and effective review. We recall that freedom of movement is protected under article 13 of the UDHR and article 26 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights. In accordance with general comment No. 27—which, while not binding on non-parties to the ICCPR, can serve as an interpretative source of customary human rights law—any restriction on freedom of movement must be lawful, necessary, proportionate, and subject to effective review by an independent authority, taking into account the negative effects it may have on the rights to family life, work, health, and education, as well as the best interests of dependent children (A/80/284). We also recall that the prolonged or indefinite maintenance of restrictive measures, including asset freezes and travel bans, may become disproportionate and quasi-punitive over time (A/80/284). We are further concerned that imposing blanket prohibitions on lawful activism and engagement with media or international actors constitutes a direct violation of the rights to freedom of expression and association, and to participate in public affairs. Finally, as noted by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, placement in rehabilitation centers by non-judicial decision may result in prolonged deprivation of liberty amounting to administrative detention. In the absence of judicial involvement, enrolment must be genuinely voluntary to avoid constituting arbitrary detention under international human rights standards (A/HRC/40/52/Add.2, para. 58; see also A/80/284, paras. 64–70 in annex). We recall the previous concerns about rehabilitation centres in Saudi Arabia expressed by Special Procedures mandate holders (A/HRC/40/52/Add.2, para. 52; and communication SAU 12/2020).
If confirmed, the facts alleged would appear to contravene, among other norms, the right to liberty and personal security, the right not to be subjected to arbitrary arrest, the right to due process and fair trial, the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and the right to participate in public affairs, as set forth in articles 3, 9, 10, 11, 19 and 20 of the UDHR, and articles 13, 14, 15, 16, 24 and 32 of the Arab Charter of Human Rights.
[1] States in denial: the long-term detention of human rights defenders https://docs.un.org/en/A/76/143, no. 41 and no. 128
[2] A/HRC/40/52/Add.2, see para. 47.
[3] CAT/C/SAU/CO/2 and Corr. 1, para. 17
[4] See, inter alia, WGAD opinions Nos. 10/2018, para. 73; 22/2019, para. 74; 26/2019, para. 102; 56/2019, para. 86; and 71/2019, para. 86.
