Grievances Court orders government agency to provide medical treatment for undocumented expatriate: Details of the ruling
Administrative courts in Saudi Arabia have established an important legal and humanitarian principle, with the Board of Grievances ordering a government agency to pay the financial dues of a private hospital for the treatment of a foreign national who was in violation of residency regulations. The hospital admitted the patient as an emergency case, and he subsequently died. The ruling affirms the state's constitutional and moral responsibility to guarantee healthcare for all those within its borders in life-threatening situations, regardless of their legal status, thus strengthening the protection of rights in the healthcare sector.
Details of the incident and the legal dispute
The case stems from a private hospital's admission of a foreign national suffering from a critical medical condition requiring immediate intervention to save his life. In compliance with regulations mandating that healthcare facilities respond to emergencies immediately and not refuse treatment, the hospital provided all necessary medical services. Despite the hospital's attempts to contact the relevant authorities to transfer the patient to a government hospital, his deteriorating condition and subsequent death prevented this.
When the hospital demanded its dues, the government agency refused to pay on the grounds that the patient was residing illegally, considering that his violation disqualified him from receiving medical coverage, which prompted the hospital to resort to the administrative judiciary to obtain justice and recover the costs of treatment.
Reasoning behind the ruling: Human beings first
The judicial circuit of the Board of Grievances rejected the government agency's arguments, affirming in its final ruling that the Kingdom's health regulations were established for the noble purpose of "preserving life," one of the five necessities. The court clarified that shortcomings in the regulations concerning the payment mechanism for residency violators do not absolve the state of its responsibilities, and the private sector should not bear the consequences of this regulatory gap as long as it fulfills its professional obligations.
The legal and humanitarian context of the Kingdom
This ruling is consistent with the Basic Law of Governance in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, specifically Article (31), which stipulates the state's responsibility for public health and the provision of healthcare. This approach reflects the Kingdom's unwavering policy of addressing humanitarian concerns, which was clearly demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic when the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques ordered that all those infected, including those in violation of residency regulations, receive free treatment without any legal repercussions, thus reinforcing the principle that health is a guaranteed human right regardless of legal status.
Economic and organizational dimensions of governance
This ruling has significant economic implications for the private healthcare sector. It reinforces investor confidence that their financial rights are firmly protected by the judiciary and that fulfilling their humanitarian and national duty to treat emergency cases will not expose them to financial losses. Furthermore, this ruling is expected to prompt legislative and executive bodies to address regulatory gaps and establish clear, written mechanisms for settling financial claims related to the treatment of similar cases in the future, thus ensuring smooth operations between the public and private sectors.
