Landmark Ruling: Saudi Activist Wins Multi-Million Pound Judgment Against Saudi Government Over Spyware and Assault
In a significant legal victory, the London High Court has ordered the Saudi government to pay a prominent Saudi satirist and human rights advocate over £3 million (approximately $4.1 million USD) in damages. The compelling judgment, delivered on Monday, concluded that the activist’s mobile phone was illegally compromised with state-of-the-art spyware, with the court finding “compelling evidence” linking the sophisticated digital intrusion directly to the Kingdom.
This landmark decision underscores the growing global scrutiny of state-sponsored surveillance and its implications for human rights, particularly for dissidents living abroad.
The Activist at the Heart of the Battle: Ghanem Al-Masarir
Ghanem Al-Masarir, a London-based comedian whose widely watched YouTube channel garnered millions of views, became a vocal critic of the Saudi regime. His satirical videos often targeted the Saudi monarchy, particularly its powerful Crown Prince, Mohammad bin Salman. In 2019, Al-Masarir initiated legal proceedings against the Saudi government, alleging that his phone was infiltrated a year prior by Pegasus, a highly advanced mobile spyware product developed by NSO Group and marketed exclusively to government entities.
Beyond the digital intrusion, Al-Masarir also endured a physical assault in London in 2018, a period coinciding with the alleged targeting of his device. He publicly accused agents operating on behalf of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of orchestrating this attack. Researchers frequently observe the sinister pairing of physical aggression with sophisticated digital espionage tactics, suggesting a coordinated effort to silence critical voices. The confluence of these traumatic events reportedly led to profound depression for Al-Masarir, effectively halting his prolific online presence and YouTube career.
The Court’s Decisive Stance: Rejecting Immunity, Affirming Accountability
The Saudi government initially sought to dismiss Al-Masarir’s legal challenge by asserting state immunity from prosecution. This defense had previously proved successful in a high-profile case where the Saudi leader faced accusations of masterminding the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi within a Saudi consulate in Turkey.
However, in Al-Masarir’s case, the High Court unequivocally rejected Saudi Arabia’s claim of immunity. Following this pivotal decision, the Kingdom chose not to participate further in the litigation, as initially reported by Reuters. This rejection of sovereign immunity marks a crucial development, potentially setting a precedent for similar cases involving allegations of state-sponsored malfeasance against dissidents on foreign soil.
Justice Saini’s Findings: Unveiling the Evidence
In his detailed ruling, Justice Pushpinder Saini stated, “There is a compelling basis for concluding that [Al-Masarir’s] iPhones were hacked by Pegasus spyware which resulted in the exfiltration of data from those mobile phones.” The judge further concluded that this clandestine hacking operation was “directed or authorised” by the Saudi government or its affiliated agents. Significantly, Justice Saini also found it highly probable that the Saudi government was responsible for the physical assault Al-Masarir endured.
The Broader Implications: A Precedent for Digital Rights?
While the judgment provides a measure of justice for Al-Masarir, several questions remain unanswered. It is currently unclear whether the Saudi government intends to comply with the court’s order and pay the substantial damages, or if it plans to launch an appeal against the ruling.
Neither NSO Group, the developer of Pegasus spyware, nor a spokesperson for the Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C., has issued an immediate response to requests for comment from media outlets regarding this significant legal outcome. This case serves as a stark reminder of the sophisticated tools available for state-level surveillance and the ongoing struggle for accountability when such powers are allegedly misused to suppress dissent and target human rights advocates globally.