UK court orders Saudi Arabia to pay over £3 million to dissident

LONDON – A British court has ordered the Saudi Arabian government to pay more than £3 million to a London-based dissident after finding the kingdom targeted him with spyware and a physical assault.

The judge ruled that the Saudi government infected the phone of Ghanem al-Masarir with Pegasus spyware. The court also held the kingdom responsible for an attack on al-Masarir by its agents outside a shop in central London in 2018.

Saudi Arabia refused to participate in the case after its initial attempt to have the lawsuit dismissed based on "sovereign immunity" failed. It remains unclear whether Riyadh will comply with the judgment.

Al-Masarir stated that if the government does not pay, he will pursue legal enforcement actions against Saudi assets located abroad.

The 45-year-old satirist was granted asylum in the United Kingdom in 2018.

The court awarded the bulk of the compensation for lost income. Al-Masarir testified that the state-sponsored surveillance and physical attack caused severe depression, which has left him unable to work.

The High Court’s ruling in London marks a watershed moment in the burgeoning global effort to curb transnational repression by autocratic regimes. It represents a rare instance where a sovereign government has been held directly liable in a foreign jurisdiction for the targeted harassment of a dissident on another nation’s soil.

The judgment stands in sharp relief to the legal precedent set in the United States. While U.S. courts ultimately dismissed litigation against Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman regarding the assassination of Jamal Khashoggi—citing sovereign immunity despite what judges acknowledged as "credible allegations"—the London ruling successfully pierced the very shield Riyadh has long utilized to evade accountability.

However, the victory remains largely symbolic until the hurdle of enforcement is cleared. Whether Saudi Arabia will voluntarily satisfy the judgment remains an open question. The plaintiff, Ghanem al-Masarir, has signaled a protracted legal campaign to identify and seize Saudi assets globally, suggesting that this landmark ruling is merely the opening salvo in a long-term battle for restitution.

Ultimately, the case delivers a dual message to the international community. On one hand, it offers a blueprint for activists seeking justice through independent judiciaries. On the other, it exposes the devastating personal toll of resisting state-sponsored surveillance. For al-Masarir, whose life and career have been effectively dismantled, the verdict is a Pyrrhic victory—one that serves as a sobering reminder of the high cost of dissent, even when the law is on your side.

While this litigation may not have a direct impact on the Vietnamese-American community, it underscores the critical importance of an independent judiciary in the West. For activists and dissidents worldwide, these legal systems remain the final sanctuary and the ultimate safeguard for justice.