Eleven human rights groups claim a report assessing Saudi Arabia’s bid for the 2034 World Cup misses critical human rights issues. They argue the assessment by Clifford Chance is flawed and could link the firm to ongoing abuses. Previous World Cup controversies have bred skepticism about FIFA’s commitment to ensuring fair human rights practices. Concerns persist about FIFA’s alignment with a country notorious for its dire human rights record under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, particularly as the bid moves forward without any rival.
Eleven prominent human rights organizations are voicing concerns about a report from the law firm Clifford Chance regarding Saudi Arabia’s bid to host the 2034 World Cup. They argue that the assessment is flawed and may link the firm to potential human rights abuses resulting from the tournament. The report is a crucial part of Saudi Arabia’s bid, raising alarms across the globe due to the country’s poor human rights record under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, which includes mass executions and repression of free expression. FIFA’s president Gianni Infantino previously faced backlash for the treatment of workers in Qatar during the last World Cup and emphasized the need for future hosts to adopt human rights strategies. As Saudi Arabia is the only bidder for the 2034 World Cup, doubts have been cast on the integrity of the report prepared for FIFA, which many view as a formality in light of the bid’s uncontested status. The human rights groups assert that the report produced by AS&H Clifford Chance precariously omits significant international human rights standards, focusing only on a narrow assessment of rights that excludes freedom of expression, association and LGBTQ rights. This selective reporting, they claim, goes against FIFA’s stated commitment to human rights frameworks, undermining the assessment’s credibility. Critics are concerned that the report primarily reflects views of Saudi government ministries and lacks input from credible external stakeholders. Without broader consultation, they fear the report enables Saudi Arabia’s continued human rights violations under the guise of hosting a global sporting event. Moreover, the report’s conclusions could facilitate an easier path for Saudi Arabia to host the World Cup despite horrific human rights implications tied to the event. Amnesty International has raised inquiries regarding how problems were sidelined in this assessment. Meanwhile, Clifford Chance’s prior achievements in human rights advocacy create an ironic backdrop to their current work for Saudi Arabia. James Lynch, co-director of FairSquare, expressed holistic frustration over FIFA’s alignment with Saudi Arabia, contending that the assessment minimizes obstacles to secure the World Cup for Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The spotlight now shines on the integrity of such assessments in the face of glaring human rights concerns, as questions linger about the report’s independence and implications for FIFA’s own policies.
In light of previous controversies surrounding human rights abuses in host countries, particularly Qatar, FIFA has asserted that all future World Cup candidates must address and strategize around human rights issues. The prevailing investigation into Saudi Arabia’s human rights situation draws attention to how hosting the global event might exacerbate existing violations. The tone of the international community shifted significantly following the 2022 tournament in Qatar, where similar issues of migrant worker treatment and systemic abuse were spotlighted.
The assessment by AS&H Clifford Chance regarding Saudi Arabia’s World Cup bid raises alarm bells for human rights advocates worldwide. Critics highlight the report’s selective omissions and the risk it poses of implicating legal entities in ongoing human rights abuses. As preparations for the 2034 tournament loom, the pressure mounts on FIFA to uphold genuine human rights commitments amidst growing skepticism about their alliances with countries like Saudi Arabia.
Original Source: www.nytimes.com
