Two sides of the Saudi public policy coin: Reconciling domestic and transnational values in recognition and enforcement of international commercial arbitration awards
This thesis investigates how the legal system of Saudi Arabia responds to the application of the concept of public policy in the judicial review of international commercial arbitration awards. This thesis demonstrates the reasons why Saudi courts have refused to recognise and implement foreign awards using the public policy defence. The thesis makes an original contribution to knowledge by precisely addressing the fundamental legal issues of the Saudi concept of public policy. The thesis offers a theoretical and practical understanding of the concept of public policy from the international and Saudi perspective, which enables this research to provide legal recommendations to reconcile domestic and transnational values. By extrapolating the available provisions of the Saudi Board of Grievances, executive courts and legislatures, and comparing them with equivalent provisions in other leading jurisdictions in the development of arbitration law, this thesis concludes that the judicial application of the Saudi concept of public policy to the international commercial arbitration awards is unsatisfactory. This thesis shows that Saudi courts have refused to recognise and implement arbitration awards on the grounds of public policy when awards contravene the fundamental principles of national law (i.e., General Jurisprudential Principles) or Islamic law (i.e., Sharia). Metaphorically, the Saudi concept of public policy is a coin with two sides, and each side is imbued with many significant legal issues. However, the main argument to tame the unruly horse of Saudi public policy and bring it into line with the leading jurisdictions in the development of arbitration law is that lawmakers, the judiciary and the Saudi legal community must take steps to reformulate the scope of Saudi public policy. This thesis proposes and recommends such steps.