Joint appeal for international protection for Saudi human rights defender detained in Bulgaria for over four years – Front Line Defenders

Report on the Case of Abdulrahman Al-Khalidi and Violations of Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

This report details the case of Saudi human rights defender Abdulrahman Al-Khalidi, who faces imminent deportation from Bulgaria to Saudi Arabia after more than four years in detention. This situation presents significant violations of international law and undermines key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). Civil society organizations are calling for immediate international intervention to halt his deportation, secure his release, and ensure Bulgaria upholds its legal and human rights obligations.

Case Background and History of Activism

Abdulrahman Al-Khalidi’s peaceful activism began during the 2011 Arab Spring with his involvement in the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association (ACPRA) and pro-reform protests. Following a crackdown on activists in 2013 and being summoned for interrogation, he fled Saudi Arabia. In exile, he continued his advocacy, notably joining the “Electronic Bees Army,” a project initiated by journalist Jamal Khashoggi to counter state-sponsored disinformation. Facing threats in Turkey, Al-Khalidi sought asylum in the European Union, arriving in Bulgaria on 23 October 2021, where he was immediately arrested.

Detention and Asylum Process in Bulgaria

Since his arrest in October 2021, Al-Khalidi has been held in detention, primarily at Sofia’s Busmantsi Detention Centre under harsh conditions. His detention period is noted as one of the longest for an asylum seeker in Europe. Key events include:

• November 2021: Al-Khalidi applied for asylum, which was subsequently rejected by the Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees based on the claim that Saudi Arabia had “taken measures to democratise society.”
• February 2024: The Bulgarian National Security Agency issued an expulsion order, labeling him a “national security threat” without presenting evidence.
• July 2025: Bulgaria’s Supreme Administrative Court rejected his appeal against the detention order, escalating the risk of deportation.
• September 2025: The Directorate of Migration extended his detention for an additional six months.

Despite several Bulgarian court rulings ordering his release, authorities have consistently ignored or circumvented these judgments, prolonging his arbitrary detention.

Violations of International Law and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The case demonstrates a severe failure to uphold SDG 16, which calls for promoting the rule of law and ensuring equal access to justice. The actions of the Bulgarian authorities directly contradict these principles:

• Lack of Access to Justice (Target 16.3): The rejection of Al-Khalidi’s asylum claim and the circumvention of court orders for his release undermine the rule of law and deny him access to a fair and impartial justice system.
• Failure of Accountable Institutions (Target 16.6): The issuance of an expulsion order based on unsubstantiated national security claims and the reported ill-treatment in detention highlight a lack of accountability and transparency within state institutions.
• Violation of Non-Refoulement: Deporting Al-Khalidi would violate this core international principle, as there is a documented risk of torture, unfair trial, and the death penalty in Saudi Arabia. This contravenes the goal of building peaceful and just societies.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The prolonged detention and mistreatment have had a devastating impact on Al-Khalidi’s physical and mental health, in direct opposition to SDG 3. Reports indicate he has endured:

• Repeated psychological pressure and physical abuse, including a brutal beating by police officers in March 2024.
• A hunger strike lasting over 100 days.
• A suicide attempt.
• A diagnosis of complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (C-PTSD).

The failure to protect his health and well-being while in state custody is a grave human rights violation.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

This case underscores the vulnerabilities of asylum seekers and challenges the commitment of SDG 10 to facilitate safe and responsible migration and uphold the rights of displaced persons. The prolonged and arbitrary detention, coupled with the denial of a fair asylum process, exemplifies the inequalities faced by individuals seeking international protection.

International Response and Calls to Action

In line with SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), a coalition of international civil society organizations has issued a unified call for action to address these violations. A 2025 European Parliament study on transnational repression has also highlighted Al-Khalidi’s case as a key example of this tactic.

Recommendations for Bulgarian Authorities

1. Immediately and unconditionally release Abdulrahman al-Khalidi in accordance with judicial rulings.
2. Guarantee that he will not be deported to Saudi Arabia or any country where he risks onward refoulement.
3. Facilitate his resettlement in a safe third country in coordination with international partners.
4. Launch an independent investigation into his ill-treatment in detention and hold those responsible to account.
5. Ensure Bulgaria’s asylum system complies with EU and international human rights standards.

Recommendations for the European Union

1. The European Commission should assess suspending any European support linked to pre-removal detention centers in Bulgaria until full compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR) is ensured.
2. The European Commission should review any support linked to Busmantsi Detention Centre to assess its compliance with the CFR.
3. The European Parliament (LIBE/DROI committees) should hold an urgent session and organise a fact-finding mission to Busmantsi Detention Centre.
4. The Council (FREMP group) should include this case on its agenda.

Signatory Organizations

1. ALQST for Human Rights
2. Bayerischer Flüchtlingsrat – Bavarian Refugee Council
3. Center for Legal Aid – Voice in Bulgaria (CLA)
4. Collettivo Rotte Balcaniche
5. DAWN
6. European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR)
7. Freedom House
8. Front Line Defenders
9. Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR)
10. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
11. International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
12. Law and Democracy Support Foundation (LDSF)
13. Melting Pot Europe
14. MENA Rights Group
15. Middle East Democracy Center (MEDC)
16. Migrant Solidarity in Bulgaria
17. Mission Wings
18. Münchner Flüchtlingsrat – Munich Refugee Council
19. No Name Kitchen
20. Orion Grid for Leadership and Authority
21. World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article primarily addresses issues related to two Sustainable Development Goals:

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: This is the most relevant SDG as the article’s core focus is on the failure of the justice system, the violation of the rule of law, and the persecution of a human rights defender. It highlights issues such as unlawful detention, denial of a fair asylum process, risk of torture, and the violation of fundamental freedoms, all of which are central to SDG 16.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article discusses the vulnerability of an asylum seeker within a national legal system. The prolonged detention, harsh conditions, and denial of a fair process highlight systemic inequalities faced by migrants and refugees. The case exemplifies the failure to protect the rights of vulnerable individuals, which is a key aspect of reducing inequalities.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article, the following specific targets can be identified:

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

     The article directly connects to this target by highlighting the “real risk of serious human rights violations” Abdulrahman Al-Khalidi faces. This includes the risk that he “would face torture, an unfair trial, and possibly the death penalty” if deported to Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, the article reports that in detention in Bulgaria, he “was brutally beaten by police officers,” which constitutes a form of violence perpetrated by state agents.

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

     This target is central to the article. The text states that “despite several court rulings in his favour, including final judgments ordering his release, the Bulgarian authorities have ignored or circumvented them.” This is a clear violation of the rule of law. The call to grant him “international protection through a fair and impartial asylum process” underscores the denial of equal access to justice he has experienced.

   • Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.

     The article identifies Al-Khalidi as a “human rights defender” who is being persecuted for his “peaceful activism” and “activity in defence of internationally recognised rights and freedoms.” His initial flight from Saudi Arabia was a result of his activism, and his current situation is a direct consequence of seeking safety from this persecution. His arbitrary detention is a violation of his fundamental freedoms.

2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.7: Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.

     The article describes a dysfunctional and unsafe asylum system, which is the opposite of a well-managed migration policy. Al-Khalidi has been “trapped in a prolonged asylum process” and has spent “over four years in detention… one of the longest periods for any asylum seeker in Europe.” The “harsh and degrading conditions” at the Busmantsi Detention Centre further demonstrate the failure to provide a safe process for asylum seekers, thereby exacerbating their vulnerability and inequality.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress:

1. Indicators for SDG 16

   • For Target 16.1: The article’s mention of Al-Khalidi being “brutally beaten by police officers” and facing the risk of “torture” implies the relevance of an indicator such as the number of verified cases of torture and ill-treatment of asylum seekers and detainees by law enforcement officials.
   • For Target 16.3: The statement that Bulgarian authorities have “ignored or circumvented” judicial rulings points to an indicator measuring the proportion of judicial rulings concerning the release of asylum seekers that are not implemented by state authorities. The lack of a “fair and impartial asylum process” also implies an indicator on the proportion of asylum applications processed within a legally defined timeframe.
   • For Target 16.10: The case of Al-Khalidi, a “human rights defender” held in detention for his activism, directly relates to Indicator 16.10.1: “Number of verified cases of killing, kidnapping, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture of journalists, associated media personnel, trade unionists and human rights advocates.” His situation is a clear case of arbitrary detention of a human rights advocate.

2. Indicators for SDG 10

   • For Target 10.7: The article’s emphasis on Al-Khalidi’s detention for “over four years” under “harsh and degrading conditions” implies indicators such as the average length of detention for asylum seekers and the number of official complaints or verified reports of human rights violations in immigration detention centers. These metrics would help measure whether migration policies are becoming safer and more responsible.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: frontlinedefenders.org