In June 2025, Saudi Arabia officially abolished the controversial Kafala (sponsorship) system, a long-standing practice that governed migrant labour for over 50 years. This change, although widely applauded as a major human rights advancement, also invites deeper reflection on the ideological and historical roots of such systems—particularly the uncomfortable truth that slavery, in various forms, has been historically embedded in parts of the Islamic system. The Kafala system, while not slavery in the traditional sense, carried disturbing similarities that many have called “modern-day slavery.”
What Was the Kafala System?
The Kafala system, derived from the Arabic word meaning “sponsorship,” was instituted in the Gulf countries during the mid-20th century, primarily to manage the influx of foreign labour required for rapid industrialisation. In Saudi Arabia, it became institutionalised as a formal legal mechanism that bound every foreign worker to a local sponsor, or Kafeel. This sponsor had full control over the worker’s legal status—determining where they could live, work, and even whether they could leave the country.
This system fundamentally denied migrant workers autonomy. Workers were unable to switch jobs without their employer’s consent, often had their passports confiscated, and were forced to obtain exit permits from the same employers to leave Saudi Arabia—even in emergencies. The level of control granted to sponsors made workers heavily dependent on the will and temperament of their employer, with virtually no recourse to justice if mistreated.
Echoes of Slavery in a Modern System
Human rights groups and international organisations, such as the International Labour Organisation (ILO), have repeatedly condemned the Kafala system, likening it to slavery. In fact, the term “modern-day slavery” has become almost synonymous with Kafala when discussed in global forums.
The comparison isn’t far-fetched. At its core, slavery is defined by the exploitation and control of one human being by another, often without consent and with restricted freedom. Under Kafala, migrant workers had no real agency—they couldn’t change jobs, leave the country, or protest abusive treatment without risking detention or deportation. Employers often withheld wages or forced employees into punishing work conditions, sometimes 18 hours a day, without legal consequences.
Islamic Tradition and the Historical Context of Slavery
To understand how systems like Kafala came to exist and persist for so long in Islamic countries, we must look into the historical relationship between Islamic jurisprudence and slavery.
Slavery was a socially accepted institution during the time of Prophet Muhammad, and Islam, like other Abrahamic religions, did not abolish it outright. Instead, Islamic teachings regulated slavery, placing emphasis on kind treatment and encouraging manumission (freeing of slaves) as a virtuous act. Slaves were permitted in warfare and were part of the economic and social structure of Islamic empires for centuries.
Although the Islamic system did not view slaves as inherently subhuman as some other systems did (e.g., the Atlantic slave trade), it still institutionalised the ownership of human beings. Over time, slavery morphed into other legal and social structures, such as indentured servitude or bonded labour. In the Gulf region, these remnants evolved into systems like Kafala—where power over foreign labourers could still be exercised, albeit under different terms.
While many Islamic scholars today argue that historical slavery was a product of its time and that Islam promotes equality and justice, the legacy of those early institutional frameworks helped lay the groundwork for later systems of control and exploitation. Kafala may not have originated solely from Islamic doctrine, but it thrived in societies where hierarchical, paternalistic labour models—arguably rooted in older Islamic and tribal traditions—were the norm.
Why the Change Now?
Saudi Arabia’s abolishment of Kafala is not just a humanitarian gesture. It’s also a calculated move in line with Vision 2030, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s ambitious plan to diversify the Saudi economy and improve the country’s global image. Saudi Arabia wants to attract foreign investment, top global talent, and transform into a knowledge-based economy. Systems that resemble slavery don’t sit well with modern business ethics.
Moreover, international pressure has played a significant role. Human rights watchdogs, global media, and foreign governments have long criticised the Kafala system, especially as stories of abuse—such as unpaid wages, sexual harassment, and forced labour—came to light. Qatar had to face similar backlash ahead of the 2022 FIFA World Cup and made reforms of its own.
A New Chapter for Migrant Workers
With the end of Kafala, the Saudi labour market is transitioning to a more standardised, contract-based model. Workers can now change jobs without their employer’s permission, leave the country freely, and have more legal mechanisms to report abuse or wage theft. This marks a dramatic shift in the quality of life for over 13 million migrant workers, mostly from developing nations like India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and the Philippines.
It also signals a deeper transformation within Saudi society—one that suggests the state is willing to part ways with outdated power structures that have no place in a modern nation.
Conclusion: A System Rooted in Control, Not Compassion
The Kafala system may not have been slavery in the literal sense, but it was a system that echoed the power dynamics of historical servitude—ironically, one that persisted in a region that once used religious justification for similar practices. Its abolition is a major step forward, but also a reminder of how systems that violate human dignity can survive for decades under religious, cultural, or economic justifications.
Ending Kafala doesn’t just mark a win for labour rights—it also challenges the idea that such systems have any place in a modern Islamic society. Going forward, true progress will depend on whether justice, equality, and human dignity can take precedence over tradition and control.
