Assessment of Inclusive Public Participation in the Personal Data Protection Law Amendment in The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Abstract

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia introduced the first technology law during Vision 2030; the Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) in September 2021. The first version of the law was never implemented for many reasons. The government issued a royal decree extending the deadline for implementation, and the data regulator initiated a deliberative process for the PDPL Amendment. This study uses a theoretical procedural fairness framework to evaluate public participation and inclusiveness in the amendment process. Public consultation and deliberation are the most differentiating factors between the first development of the law amendment process. The evaluation of inclusiveness and public participation is contrasted with the experiences in the GDPR development and UK GDPR public consultation process since the UK only amended GDPR post-Brexit. This study does not offer a direct comparison to these international experiences but verifies the completeness of the Saudi experience. The study gathers data mainly from interviews with officials who significantly contributed to the amendment of the PDPL. The process to amend the PDPL resulted in a new regulatory approach that aligns with the GDPR best practices. It resolved the main issues highlighted during a process of private and public consultation. This study offers a nuanced view on the tools that facilitated engagement with different stakeholders in the pursuit of amending the law to meet diverse set of objectives including resolution no. 713 established the first requirement for evidence-based policymaking and required a call for public consultation in the event of the law amendment. The embedded Vision 2030 policies and procedures that implement collaborative cooperation inside the government organized unofficial working groups that collaborated to advocate for a diverse set of objectives presented in the feedback from non-government organizations. The highly iterative deliberation process during the private consultation phase enabled different parties to scrutinize conclusions and improve deliberation outcomes. Initiatives from different officials allowed the interests of vulnerable groups to be evaluated. These factors helped develop a shared understanding between different stakeholders during the private and public consultation periods. However, the separation of private and public consultations limited transparency and might have jeopardized the effort to include different voices. The effect of this approach to law amendment will require further assessment through interviews with non-government stakeholders.