The Evolution of Public Policy in Saudi Arbitration Law: From Shari'a Prevalence to Alignment with International Norms

Abstract

This dissertation explores the development of public policy within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s arbitration law. Despite the adoption of reforms such as the Arbitration Law in 2012, Saudi Arabia continues to apply public policy through the lens of Islamic Shari’a, which often results in uncertainty regarding the enforcement and setting aside of arbitral awards. The study critically examines whether the introduction of the Civil Transactions Law in 2023 has contributed to narrowing the interpretative scope of public policy or whether it has reinforced existing religious legal norms within a codified framework. Through doctrinal and comparative legal analysis, the research evaluates statutory instruments, judicial decisions, and academic perspectives, drawing comparisons with jurisdictions such as the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, France, and the United Kingdom.

The findings suggest that while the Civil Transactions Law introduces a measure of legal predictability, the foundational role of Shari’a remains the central normative reference point in Saudi judicial reasoning. This has ongoing implications for users of arbitration, particularly foreign investors and legal practitioners, who seek to understand the direction of arbitration reform in Saudi Arabia.