Saudi Princesses


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Oh, stop the nonsense. ...... People run away because they are frightened and unhappy. .......Look in the mirror. People run away because they have miserable lives and are unhappy.....

"Looking in the mirror" means to recognize own mistakes. If we both look in the same mirror, we will recognize differences. But there will be always seen faults which perpetrated from both sides. No one is free from such things. You should not forget it!
 
We should talk about the corresponding case of the the wife of a Saudi prince and do not overlap the topic of the thread with generalizations.

Background informations for a better understanding may be important to a certain degree here in the current thread, but in my opinion they should be well researched and do not represent the reproduction of prejudice or biased viewpoints.
 
You always have to follow the laws of the country you live or work in.

Of course, I think you're absolutely right. However, this raises the question of the legality of an employment contract, which was concluded abroad and not initially intended for use in United States. Probably we can not find an answer and maybe it exceeds the intentions of the thread, but again the questions: Would there a need for a changing of a preceding, valid existing foreign treaty? Is there a law in U.S. which describes a minimum wage or a maximum amount of work of certain individuals or is it freely negotiable?
 
Last edited:
There is a minimum wage and there are laws that protect workers from abusive work conditions. They must have a day off. Be free to go wherever they want. You cannot take someone's passport. I am sure she flew in the first class cabin to take care of their needs, not because they wanted her comfortable.
 
There is a minimum wage and there are laws that protect workers from abusive work conditions. They must have a day off. Be free to go wherever they want. You cannot take someone's passport......

My thanks for answering of a part of my questions. It helps to illuminate the case from different perspectives. Does your statement also refers to "foreign work contracts" or only focus on contracts which concluded in United States? Is there a connection between the residence status and the stipulated work?

Maybe I had ignored or it was not written, but it is known whether the Saudi royal family has forbidden the housemaids to leave the family´s home at their leisure? If so, security reasons may be considered of this decision..... Did security reasons change the facts - in legal terms?

In accordance with the state of the presently known allegations only it exists obviously a problem of the maids passports which were confiscated by the wife of the Saudi prince.
 
Last edited:
If you are living and working in the US both the employer and the employee are subject to the laws of the US including its laws on employment and working conditions/pay/holidays/time off etc.
 
If you are living and working in the US both the employer and the employee are subject to the laws of the US including its laws on employment and working conditions/pay/holidays/time off etc.

Well, that is understandable. But in the case of the wife of a Saudi prince, the maids and the Saudi family came to America temporarily. Both parties do not have U.S. passports and only a residence visas out of diplomatic reasons, as I know. The contract between employer and employees already existed in Saudi Arabia for some time. In such a case, does there a need to change the contract?? That would be unusual, but maybe legally more correct.

I assume that the Saudi prince hold a diplomatic status. But which status have the wife? Automatically she should then also hold a diplomatic passport. Who is the employer of the maids? The prince or his wife? Does this legally make a difference?

If the Saudi prince is a diplomat (this includes also his wife as a family member) and if the house was rented in his name, then the house including the land "belongs" temporary to the territory of the State which the Prince represents ("the property in the United States of a foreign state shall be immune from attachment, arrest and execution" - 28 U.S.C. § 1609). Means: Diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country's laws, although they can still be extradited.

There is a diplomatic immunity from local employment and labor law when employing (foreign) staff. When the employer is a diplomat, the employees are in a legal limbo where the laws of neither the host country nor the diplomat's country are enforceable. The diplomat employer can act with virtual impunity and it is virtually impossible to enforce payment of wages or any local standards whatsoever.

A further point: The legal definition of abuse of domestic workers is socio-culturally influenced and varies from country to country for this reason. The jurisprudence must guarantee justice for both parties. Besides the fact of diplomatic immunity it is therefore difficult to find a single legal basis, which makes the whole negotiable in cross-border cases with involved diplomats. Please, correct me if I´m wrong.

Apologies, but there are a lot of unanswered issues for me. With my statements and comments I just wanted to illustrate the complexity of the case which media coverage let often unheeded. I'm afraid our discussion (including my remarks) exceeds the main theme of the thread many times over. So I think we should rather wait for the results of the investigation authorities than to continue to discuss the case of the saudi royal member. There is also the risk that the discussion here getting out of hand as a result of many unanswered questions.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
If the Saudi Prince in question does in fact enjoys a diplomatic status, the US authorities have got serious proof of wrongdoing. As I have noted earlier, the district attorney would not have bothered with the case knowing that it could be dismissed later. It is always a headache to deal with Saudis.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
If the Saudi Prince in question does in fact enjoys a diplomatic status, the US authorities have got serious proof of wrongdoing. As I have noted earlier, the district attorney would not have bothered with the case knowing that it could be dismissed later.

Sometimes American court argue that abusive work (for instance housemaids with foreign treaties) is a commercial activity engaged in for personal profit, which falls outside the scope of a diplomat’s official functions, and therefore diplomatic immunity does not apply. But this is not clear from a legal point of view.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
Why would the Prince in question allow his wife to be humiliated this way?
The discussion is doomed to run in circles. The difference in mentality is deep. So going back and forth with arguments is a futile exercise. People in Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf countries are very fond of saying, "When in Rome do as Romans do". The Princess in question should have followed this principle.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
Why would the Prince in question allow his wife to be humiliated this way?

Good question! :flowers: No idea ........(a previous part of the sentence has been deleted by me after an important clue of blauerengel) to what extent the whole case actually exists in a diplomatic context. One thing is clear: She is not related by blood to the royal family of Saudi Arabia. As it´s already mentioned: There are too many inconsistencies and ambiguities which let "the discussion doomed to run in circles" .....
 
Last edited:
:previous:
If the Saudi Prince in question does in fact enjoys a diplomatic status, the US authorities have got serious proof of wrongdoing. As I have noted earlier, the district attorney would not have bothered with the case knowing that it could be dismissed later. It is always a headache to deal with Saudis.

That´s true,diplomats enjoy a lot of privileges and freedom,they are untouchable,no matter in which country they reside. In Vienna we also have difficulties with some diplomats who believe they are above the law-they don´t pay their parking tickets,disrespect labor laws etc.etc.
I remember there was a scandal about a case similar to the one we discuss in this thread, a diplomat from a non-EU country treated his staff as if they were his slaves, they got very little pay + had to work much more than it is allowed in our country. Unfortunately the problem is not limited to Saudis,we also have many ex-Soviet diplomats who are not respecting our laws and some local politicians who are corrupt too.
The only positive aspect is that we have an independent press that reports about such crimes and the victims are able to seek help & make use of our legal system that supports them.
 
Last edited:
Good question! :flowers: No idea with whom the lady (who was only declared by the newspaper as Saudi Princess) is married by the royal family and to what extent the whole case actually exists in a diplomatic context.

Dear Majid,you would be much more knowledgeable if you would read carefully,because the name of the husband has already been mentioned before. The identity of the prince is no secret, if you want to take part in an informed discussion you should pay more attention to such subtle but important details :whistling:
"Alayban is a wife of Saudi Arabian Prince Abdulrahman bin Nasser bin Abdulaziz al Saud, according to the Orange county prosecutors." (<-guardian)
 
Dear Majid,you would be much more knowledgeable if you would read carefully,because the name of the husband has already been mentioned before. The identity of the prince is no secret, if you want to take part in an informed discussion you should pay more attention to such subtle but important details :whistling:

You are absolutely right! Spot-on. Either I have overlooked it or simply forgotten. Thanks for reminding me! :flowers: I've changed my former post #252. The shame should not be for eternity! ;)
 
Last edited:
From the article below:

"Meshael Alayban, 42, who prosecutors said is one of the six wives of Saudi Prince Abdulrahman bin Nasser bin Abdulaziz al Saud, was released Thursday after posting the hefty bail amount a day after her arrest."

One of six wifes??? :hmm: Weird! In Islam, only a maximum of four wives are allowed (at the same time). Either a typo, or some of the women are already divorced from the Prince. Maybe Mrs. Alayban is one of the divorced wifes. That would also explain why it can be possible that she has no diplomatic passport at the moment. On the other hand, not until last year Californien has adopted this appropriate law. It's quite possible that it was also decided to abjudicate the immunity of diplomats when they are suspected to have acted contrary to this law.

Prince Abdulrahman bin Nasser bin Abdulaziz al Saud is one of the grandsons of the late first Saudi king. The grandfather of Prince Adulrahman had founded the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and ruled the country from 1932 to 1953.

Saudi princess free on $5 million bail in Calif. | News , International | THE DAILY STAR
 
Last edited:
From the article below:

"Meshael Alayban, 42, who prosecutors said is one of the six wives of Saudi Prince Abdulrahman bin Nasser bin Abdulaziz al Saud, was released Thursday after posting the hefty bail amount a day after her arrest."

One of six wifes??? :hmm: Weird! In Islam, only a maximum of four wives are allowed (at the same time). Either a typo, or some of the women are already divorced from the Prince. Maybe Mrs. Alayban is one of the divorced wifes. That would also explain why it can be possible that she has no diplomatic passport at the moment. On the other hand, not until last year Californien has adopted this appropriate law. It's quite possible that it was also decided to abjudicate the immunity of diplomats when they are suspected to have acted contrary to this law.

Prince Abdulrahman bin Nasser bin Abdulaziz al Saud is one of the grandsons of the late first Saudi king. The grandfather of Prince Adulrahman had founded the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and ruled the country from 1932 to 1953.

Saudi princess free on $5 million bail in Calif. | News , International | THE DAILY STAR

Well, we do not know the details of the marrital status of this Saudi Prince :ermm:
He can only have 4 wives at the same time,but it might be that he had a temporary marriage with two of the women at a certain time or got divorced....
I wonder how the situation is handled in countries where polygamy is not allowed-how do you treat the second/3rd/4th wive who got married in a foreign country according to Islamic teachings?
If you allowed to have only one wife (or get divorced and remarry), would the second wife have a similar status to a girlfriend or be treated like a wife?
 
I wonder how the situation is handled in countries where polygamy is not allowed-how do you treat the second/3rd/4th wive who got married in a foreign country according to Islamic teachings? If you allowed to have only one wife (or get divorced and remarry), would the second wife have a similar status to a girlfriend or be treated like a wife?

Regardless of where a Muslim lives, he must treat all his wives equally with the same respect. The second, third and fourth wife have the same status like the first wife. It should be not a difference between them.
 
How come Islam is such a lightning rod for debate. There are many Christian royals who don't follow Christianity, which is why we debate their flaws on these forums. Lol
 
How come Islam is such a lightning rod for debate. There are many Christian royals who don't follow Christianity, which is why we debate their flaws on these forums. Lol

It has nothing to do with religion....The behaviors of people are always closely related to their personal character.....
 
It has nothing to do with religion....The behaviors of people are always closely related to their personal character.....
I could buy that. But some people equate another's religious choice with good or bad.
 
Saudi princess accused of human trafficking a 'slave maid' into her California home is cleared of all charges | Mail Online
Human trafficking charges against a Saudi princess accused of holding a Kenyan servant as a virtual prisoner in her California home were dismissed by a judge today, after prosecutors said they were unable to corroborate the allegations.
The 42-year-old princess, Meshael Alayban, smiled broadly as she left the Santa Ana courtroom after the judge lifted her $5 million bond, returned her passports to her and ordered that an electronic monitoring device be removed.
Alayban had been charged with bringing her accuser to the United States in May, confiscating her passport and paying her $220 a month to work 16 hours a day, seven days a week in circumstances Orange County's top prosecutor likened to slavery.
 
Of course in this country your iinnocent until proven guilty
 
:previous:
If the Saudi Prince in question does in fact enjoys a diplomatic status, the US authorities have got serious proof of wrongdoing. As I have noted earlier, the district attorney would not have bothered with the case knowing that it could be dismissed later. It is always a headache to deal with Saudis.

When it comes to diplomatic immunity it has nothing to do with a diplomatic passport it all has to do with the visa you hold in whatever country you are in. If you work in the diplomatic sector like embassy or consulates you get the immunity but if you don't you don't have the immunity for example if you carry a tourism or student visa and break the law you will be punished according to law of whatever country you fare in.
 
And, if you are a Saudi Princess, you, probably, can break the law anywhere, as huge money flows to stop the accusation. It is all BS. It is power and disgusting.
 
And, if you are a Saudi Princess, you, probably, can break the law anywhere, as huge money flows to stop the accusation. It is all BS. It is power and disgusting.


He he he. But money cannot buy love. It simply cannot. He he he
 
Prisoners at the palace: Saudi princesses plead for help as they claim they are being held by the king against their will | Mail Online
Two daughters of the King of Saudi Arabia claim they and their sisters have been held prisoner in the royal palace for 13 years.
Princesses Sahar, 42, and Jawaher, 38, said that they are being kept against their will in a guarded villa in the royal compound in Jeddah.
Their claims shed light into the usually secret world of royal family of a country where women are effectively treated as second-class citizens.
 
Back
Top Bottom