The grievance was filed just a few months before Saudi Arabia, the only bidder, was supposed to be chosen by FIFA to host the 2034 World Cup
The International Labour Organization of the UN has received a complaint accusing Saudi Arabia, the country most likely to host the World Cup in 2034, of using forced labor on a large scale among its large migrant workforce.
According to the ILO complaint, migrant workers in Saudi Arabia are accused of a wide range of labor rights breaches, such as nonpayment of salaries, passport confiscation, unlawful recruitment fees, debt bondage, and restrictions on their ability to change jobs freely.
The Building and Wood Workers’ International (BWI), the trade union that filed the complaint, claims that the infractions amount to “an epidemic of abuses.”
It said that they were proof of forced labor, a contemporary form of slavery and that Saudi Arabia would be in violation of the UN’s agreements on forced labor.}
“Saudi Arabia, where trade unions are banned, blatantly disregards international labor standards and fails to compensate migrant workers who have suffered abuses for over a decade,” stated Ambet Yuson, general secretary of the BWI.
The trade union is requesting that the ILO look into the alleged infractions. It claims to represent over 12 million workers. Organizations that investigate violations of human rights related to labor migration and sports, such as FairSquare, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW), support it.
The grievance was filed just a few months before Saudi Arabia, the only bidder, was supposed to be chosen by FIFA to host the 2034 World Cup.
The action is expected to put significant pressure on Fifa, which is already hearing requests to ban the Gulf state from hosting the tournament in the event that it doesn’t uphold its human rights commitments.
Countries hoping to host the World Cup in 2030 and 2034 are required by FIFA‘s bidding regulations to pledge to “respect internationally recognised human rights”.
HRW’s director of global campaigns, Minky Worden, stated: “The lawsuit essentially asserts that Saudi Arabia lacks significant safeguards against forced labor.
She described the file as “truly historic” and said that it would be the only major obstacle standing in the way of Fifa crowning Saudi Arabia as the 2034 World Cup host nation. “Fifa is required by its human rights policy to provide information on how it will evaluate and reduce risks to migrant labor rights.”
Amnesty International’s head of economic and social justice, Steve Cockburn, stated that Fifa “could provide a much-needed spur for labor reform” if it demands legally enforceable human rights agreements prior to deciding on the 2034 competition.
He said, “It would virtually guarantee forced labor being at the center of its flagship tournament if it didn’t do so.”
In response to a similar complaint made by the International Trade Union Confederation against Qatar in 2014, the ILO and the 2022 World Cup host collaborated to change Qatar’s labor regulations.
As a result of the process, the Gulf state implemented a minimum wage and essentially abolished its kafala (sponsorship) system, which prohibited people from changing occupations at will. However, experts on labor rights have questioned the effectiveness of these changes.
Similar to Qatar, Saudi Arabia depends significantly on migrant laborers, primarily from south Asia and portions of Africa, although on a much larger scale—more than 13 million foreigners call Saudi Arabia home.
If the nation is granted the privilege of hosting the World Cup, these figures are probably going to skyrocket since the competition will demand significant infrastructure development, including new stadiums, hotels, training facilities, and transportation networks.
Although Saudi Arabia started implementing certain labor reforms recently, the BWI’s findings indicate that the mistreatment of migrant workers is still pervasive.
A poll of 193 migrant workers who have worked or are now working in Saudi Arabia is included in its complaint. According to the survey, 63% of respondents claimed they were unable to quit their jobs with reasonable notice or take time off when their contracts expired, and 65% claimed their employer had denied them access to their personal documents, such as passports.
