Saudi’s Claim That WTO Report Exonerates Them of Collusion with Piracy

Posted on June 16th, 2020 | No Comments |

Saudi Press Agency: Claiming that WTO report exhonerates KSA

Earlier today, I published the WTO report on Saudi Arabia’s piracy of Premier League games and as expected, it didn’t take long for the Saudi Press Agency to respond to the ruling, which I am also publishing below in full. Unsurprisingly, they try to put a very positive spin on it, even claiming that the WTO actually rejected the allegation that the Saudi government supported piracy, but I will make no further comment on it until I have studied the full 125 page report in detail, along with the much shorter response below.

“A World Trade Organization (WTO) dispute panel released its report Tuesday ruling against Qatar, and finding that Saudi Arabia’s national security defence was justified under WTO rules.

“The WTO panel acknowledged that Saudi Arabia “seeks to protect Saudi citizens and the Saudi population, Saudi government institutions, and the territory of Saudi Arabia from the threats of terrorism and extremism” raised by Qatar in the region.

“The panel also found that Saudi Arabia’s comprehensive actions were “taken in time of… other emergency in international relations,” based on extensive evidence presented to the WTO tribunal by Saudi Arabia regarding Qatar’s violations of regional agreements and commitments to renounce support for violence and unrest in the region.

“Saudi Arabia also confirmed to the panel that it provides strong protection of intellectual property rights, including criminal procedures and penalties in cases where credible evidence is available to the Government to support the initiation of proceedings.

“In addition to accepting Saudi Arabia’s national security defence, the panel rejected Qatar’s remaining claims that Saudi law violated WTO rules, and rejected claims that the Saudi government supported the alleged copyright piracy. Out of six claims by Qatar, the panel’s single finding regarding criminal proceedings was rendered moot in the course of the WTO dispute.”