New Delhi: A 24-year-old Sri Lankan engineer facing the death penalty in Saudi Arabia over a Facebook comment has left his family fighting a legal battle from thousands of kilometres away, raising questions about the vulnerability of migrant workers facing unfamiliar laws, language barriers and limited access to legal representation.
Anojan Sivarasa was initially sentenced to five years in prison for blasphemy against Islam and Prophet Muhammad over a comment he posted while he was in Sri Lanka. He had returned to Saudi Arabia unaware that the comment could lead to a death sentence.
From online comment to five-year sentence
Sivarasa, originally from Natpittimunai in Sri Lanka’s eastern province, moved to Saudi Arabia in September 2025 to work as a technical engineer at a battery factory. He had studied mechanical engineering at Sri Lanka’s Uva Wellassa University and, according to his family, had been planning to marry this year.
In June, less than a year after he moved to Saudi Arabia, a video of a Muslim man kicking a dog that was following pilgrims undertaking the annual Pada Yatra to Kataragama went viral in Sri Lanka, triggering debates, according to BBC and Sri Lankan media reports.
Sivarasa, who was in Sri Lanka at the time, responded to a person making derogatory comments about a Hindu deity with remarks against Prophet Muhammad. His brother, Hamsidan Sivarasa, told BBC Sinhala that Sivarasa later deleted the comment and apologised. But screenshots were sent by people in Sri Lanka to his employer in Saudi Arabia, leading to his arrest in July, his brother said.
His phone and computer were confiscated and his social media accounts were deleted.
On 27 July, the Al-Ahsa Criminal Court sentenced Sivarasa to five years in prison and fined him three million Saudi riyals (around Rs 7.7 crore) under Saudi Arabia’s cybercrime law.
Five-year sentence becomes death penalty
Sivarasa’s family appealed against the sentence but Sri Lanka’s foreign minister said an appeal seeking a reduction had been rejected. Separately, the Saudi prosecution appealed for the case to be heard under Sharia law rather than the cybercrime law.
The appellate court accepted the prosecution’s request and, on 17 September, sentenced Sivarasa to death for insulting Prophet Muhammad.
The following day, seemingly unaware of the development, Sri Lanka’s Foreign Ministry said it was closely following the case through its embassy in Riyadh and remained in contact with Saudi authorities through diplomatic channels. At the time, the ministry said Sivarasa was still undergoing judicial proceedings.
It was only on 22 September that the Sri Lankan government publicly announced the death sentence. Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath said the government was considering diplomatic intervention, legal advice and a possible appeal before the Saudi Supreme Court. The government also said it would cover the legal costs.
The case has since drawn public attention in Sri Lanka, with petitions and protests reported in parts of the country. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has also stepped in and instructed diplomatic channels to engage with Saudi authorities. According to the World Socialist Web Site, after meeting Sivarasa’s parents on 21 September, the president said a formal diplomatic appeal for a pardon would be made to the Saudi King.
A four-member Sri Lankan legal delegation has since travelled to Saudi Arabia to meet Sivarasa’s local defence lawyers and explore legal options.
A difficult appeal from abroad
The death sentence remains in place as Sri Lankan authorities pursue diplomatic and legal options. For Sivarasa’s family, the battle is becoming increasingly difficult to navigate from Sri Lanka.
Sri Lankan officials in Saudi Arabia had sought legal advice on the prospects of appealing or reducing the original sentence, which were assessed as “extremely low”, according to Jaffna Monitor, a Sri Lankan news website.
The report said Sivarasa’s family had already spent around 1.89 million Sri Lankan rupees (around Rs 5.5 lakh) on legal costs and questioned the timing and handling of the appeal.
His case has also renewed concerns over the protection available to migrant workers when they run afoul of the laws of their host countries, particularly when they face unfamiliar legal systems and limited access to legal support.
The European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR), which monitors human rights in Saudi Arabia, has said trials involving foreign nationals are often marred by violations of due process.
Saudi Arabia’s use of the death penalty has also drawn scrutiny over its treatment of foreign nationals. Foreign nationals accounted for 58 percent of 347 executions in the country in 2025, up from 31 percent in 2024, according to ESOHR. Saudi Arabia executed 202 foreign nationals that year, 79 percent of them for non-lethal drug-related offences.
Sivarasa’s case also recalls that of Rizana Nafeek, a 17-year-old Sri Lankan domestic worker who was executed in Saudi Arabia in 2013 after being convicted of killing a four-month-old infant. Human rights groups had raised concerns about her trial and said she had been forced to confess.
(Edited by Chingkheinganbi Mayengbam)
Saudi Arabia is a Sharia paradise.
Those in India who advocate for Sharia law want the exact same ‘paradise’ to be recreated on Indian soil.
This is what Sharia law is. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.