OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier - The Middle East.
Local dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022
51
ROBOT CITIZENSHIP AND GENDER (IN)EQUALITY:
THE CASE OF SOPHIA THE ROBOT IN SAUDI ARABIA
JOANA VILELA FERNANDES
joana.vilela@outlook.com
Joana Vilela Fernandes got a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and International Relations
from the NOVA University Lisbon and a Master's degree in International Relations from the
University Institute of Lisbon (ISCTE-IUL, Portugal). She wrote a thesis on women's rights in
Saudi Arabia entitled "Robot citizenship and women's rights: the case of Sophia the robot in
Saudi Arabia".
Abstract
On the 25th of October 2017, Sophia, the humanoid robot created by Hanson Robotics, was
declared an official Saudi citizen during the Summit on Future Investment Initiative in Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia. Since Saudi Arabia is known for still holding onto strong religious as well as
conservative values and for still classifying Saudi women as second-class citizens, it seems
quite peculiar that the Kingdom would grant the official citizenship status to a female-looking
non-human being. In other words, this specific decision has come to highlight the deeply
rooted gender disparities in the Kingdom even more, especially as Saudi women face a
constant battle for their recognition as official Saudi citizens and for the concession of their
basic human rights. Although, on the one hand, Saudi Arabia has been trying to picture
themselves as trying to make steps forward in what the Western world would consider the
right direction regarding the evolution of Saudi women’s rights through, for instance, the
publication of more progressive reform programs such as Vision 2030, the Kingdom is, on the
other hand, simultaneously repressing Saudi women’s active resistance against the patriarchal
Saudi traditions. So, while Sophia the robot was granted the official citizenship status
effortlessly and very rapidly, Saudi women are actively protesting for their rights.
This article is based on an explorative approach of the existent literature as it intends to study
the Saudi government’s unique decision of granting Sophia the Saudi citizenship; and to
prospect Saudi women activists’ current struggles against the government and the muttawas,
the Islamic religious police, in their fight for equal rights compared to Sophia’s situation. Thus,
the present article will briefly mention the reasons why Sophia was granted this status and
demonstrate how the treatment of Saudi women activists does not comply with the
progressive image Saudi Arabia is trying to portray.
Keywords
Activism, Citizenship, Human rights, Saudi Arabia, Sophia, the humanoid robot
How to cite this article
Fernandes, Joana Vilela (2021). Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia
the robot in Saudi Arabia. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. VOL12 N2, TD2 -
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local dynamics, regional actors, global challenges,
February 2022. Consulted [online] in date of the last visit, https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-
7251.DT0122.4
Article received on May 27, 2021 and accepted for publication on October 10, 2021
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
52
ROBOT CITIZENSHIP AND GENDER (IN)EQUALITY:
THE CASE OF SOPHIA THE ROBOT IN SAUDI ARABIA
JOANA VILELA FERNANDES
Introduction
The current technological innovations in terms of Artificial Intelligence (AI) have opened
up new opportunities and enabled unprecedented events. In this context, on the 25th of
October 2017, Sophia, the humanoid robot, was declared an official Saudi citizen during
the Summit on Future Investment Initiative in Riyadh, presenting the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia as the first country worldwide to declare a machine an official citizen (Chikhale
and Gohad, 2018: 107). This announcement unleashed many ethical and social debates
in the field of women’s rights, as Saudi Arabia is known for still holding onto strong
religious, patriarchal and conservative values (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 17; Coleman,
2004: 81).
The peculiarity of this case is founded, among other issues, on the two following
concerns. On the one hand, a female-looking non-human being was granted the official
Saudi citizenship very easily and effortlessly while Saudi women are not only still being
classified as passive members of society and/or second-class citizens, but also actively
protesting for their recognition as official Saudi citizens and for the concession of their
basic human rights (Chikhale and Gohad, 2018: 107; Joseph, 2005: 151). On the other
hand, although the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wants to picture itself as attempting to make
steps forward in what the Western world would consider the right direction regarding the
evolution of Saudi women’s rights, the Saudi government is simultaneously repressing
Saudi women’s active resistance against the patriarchal Saudi traditions and does not
tolerate protests of any kind not even peaceful demonstrations in favor of Saudi
women’s rights. In this regard, Saudi Arabia’s paradoxical decision of granting Sophia
the Saudi citizenship has come to further highlight the deeply rooted gender disparities
in the Kingdom (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 18-19).
The present article is based on an explorative approach to the following research
question: How can a female-looking robot get more liberties than women in Saudi
Arabia?” (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 18-19). The analysis particularly focuses on Saudi
women activists rather than Saudi women in general with a threefold objective. First, this
article aims to study the unique decision that the Saudi government took back in 2017
regarding Sophia’s citizenship status. Second, it intends to prospect Saudi women
activists’ current struggles against the government and the muttawas (the Islamic
religious police) in order to explore Saudi women’s role in the acquisition of their basic
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
53
rights and official citizenship status all while comparing their current situation to the ease
in which Sophia obtained the official Saudi citizenship. Third, this article will analyze how
the government and the local authorities deal with feminist protests with the purpose of
demonstrating how the treatment of Saudi women activists does not comply with the
progressive image Saudi Arabia is trying to portray.
1. Methodology
The present research is based on an explorative approach and uses a qualitative
methodology, particularly a literature review on Islamic feminism, Saudi women’s
struggles, Saudi laws, Sophia’s behavior and the robot’s liberties in Saudi Arabia. In order
to examine the content systematically, the research calls not only for the definition of
the main concepts, namely citizenship, feminism and Islamic feminism, but also for a
brief description of Sophia and the respective analysis of the above mentioned topics. In
contrast to the predominantly used pronouns “she” and “her” for Sophia, the present
article will be using “it” and “its”. This differentiation emphasizes Sophia’s being as a
machine in opposition to Saudi women as human beings and facilitates the distinction
between both parties (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 30).
In order to achieve the above suggested objectives, the scholarship was carefully chosen
and analyzed. In this sense, the research was divided into two categories. While the first
selection included the topics of Sophia’s citizenship ceremony and its journey to as well
as stay in Saudi Arabia, the articles on Saudi women focused on their rights as well as
the evolution of their liberties. Moreover, the research was conducted in English, German,
French, Spanish as well as in Portuguese, and also included English written articles from
Saudi Arabia with the aim of having more diverse points of view and avoiding a purely
Westernized influence on this issue. Along with the relevant scholarship, legal documents
such as royal decrees and reform programs from Saudi Arabia have been taken into
account for the analysis.
1
Since laws on robot citizenship have not been released yet, this
aspect could unfortunately not be taken into consideration. The conducted interview with
David Hanson, founder and CEO of Hanson Robotics, and Ben Goertzel, leader behind the
software team that created Sophia, also represents an interesting and crucially relevant
insight for projects of this scope (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 21-22).
2
This ensemble of sources facilitated the identification of Sophia’s rights and citizenship
status in Saudi Arabia while comparing both, Saudi women and Sophia, in order to
demonstrate that the machine has more liberties than Saudi women, and it also opened
the door for the exploration of Saudi women’s role in the acquisition of their basic rights
and official citizenship status. In other words, the chosen scholarship particularly their
legal approach enabled the analysis of Saudi women as activists fighting for equal rights
and a) was thus especially helpful with the indication of any developments regarding
Saudi women’s rights; b) allowed a better understanding of Saudi women’s current
1
These documents include laws such as the Basic Law of Governance, the law on the Saudi Citizenship
System, the Saudi Nationality Laws and the current reform program Vision 2030.
2
The interview took place during the 10th edition of the Web Summit in Lisbon, in November of 2019.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
54
situation; c) evidenced whether or not the Saudi government is willing to implement
changes concerning Saudi women’s rights.
The selection of this specific case is justified by the observed contradictions that
seemingly coin the Saudi Arabian priorities and policies. In fact, Sophia’s citizenship
showcases a paradoxical view of the concept of citizenship and highlights gender
inequality in the Kingdom as well as Saudi women’s protests. While Saudi Arabia is
demonstrating a strong willingness to modernize their country by means of technological
investment, such as the introduction of robot citizenship and the creation of a city where
robots will outnumber people
3
, and while women’s rights have witnessed a positive
evolution, the government is simultaneously shutting down Saudi women’s protests in
favor of gender equality (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 18; 57; 20 minutes, 2019). It is
noteworthy that women’s empowerment is a vital aspect for good governance as well as
social and economical development. Only when a country includes this aspect of civil
society into their calculations for good governance, it will be able to create a robust as
well as self-sustaining social structure (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 17).
2. Definition of the main concepts
2.1. Citizenship
Citizenship refers to contract-making individuals who are bound together by a society
and who defend their rights, duties as well as interests within this society. This set of
rights, duties and interests otherwise known as human rights are inherent to all
human beings without discrimination, no matter their sex, nationality, religion or any
other status, and entail every type of shared right and obligations, such as social, civic,
political and economic rights. However, this definition corresponds to the Western
concept of an undifferentiated and homogenous citizenship. Therefore, it does not
necessarily apply to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Altorki, 2000: 215; Vilela Fernandes,
2020: 22-23).
As a matter of fact, Saudi Arabia has no constitution per se. Instead, the Kingdom uses
the Shari’a as its fundamental law and ties the notion and practice of community to
kinship, which is valued over the membership to the state (Altorki, 2000: 215, 218;
Joseph, 2005: 149).
4
According to this system, Saudi women’s social status is limited to
the roles of mothers and wives who have to take care of their family and household and
who have to be controlled by men (Doumato, 1999: 578). In other words, kinship is
infiltrating the economic, political, religious as well as social domains of the Saudi society;
devolving the family into the crucial identifying unit of membership to the state;
transporting gendered and aged discourses as well as practices into citizenship; and
3
The megacity “Neomwas planned alongside Hanson Robotics. It is designed as an international tourism
and business hub where everything will have a link to AI as well as the internet and as a city with fewer
rules than the rest of Saudi Arabia. Accordingly, in Neom, women will allegedly be allowed to appear in
public without wearing an abaaya. It remains to be seen, however, if Neom will actually be built (Estes,
2017).
4
Even though the Shari’a does not reference the concept of citizenship, the Saudi Arabian state regulates
the conditions under which one can become a Saudi citizen. In this sense, citizenship is either passed on
by a) the blood criteria (being born into a traditional Saudi family where the father or both parents are
Saudi citizens); b) having settled in Saudi Arabia for over 10 years, c) reaching legal age; d) marriage; or
e) being fluent in Arabic and complying with the national norms of conduct (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 32).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
55
enabling the existence of the guardianship system according to which every Saudi woman
needs a guardian. This role is usually assumed by either the father or husband and entails
having the power to take critical decisions on the woman’s behalf. As a result, Saudi
women are subjected to a system where they are dependent on men and the patriarchal
structures; where their status as a family member is their qualifying factor for citizenship;
and where they thereby face daily discrimination regarding the promotion of their
fundamental rights (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 22, 31-33).
Overall, we can observe the masculinization of the concept of citizenship in Saudi Arabia
which results in significant limitations for women’s positions in society, such as mitigating
their equality, being seen as lacking political personhood and being categorized as
indirect or second-class citizens (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 22, 31-33). In this context, the
term “patriarchal connectivity” is used to further express how the kinship system is
enabled to entangle itself with the public and private spheres of life, the state and civil
society as well as religion and nation. These patriarchal relations specifically subordinate
Saudi women, award Saudi men with dominance as well as authority and enable the
existence of the strict male guardianship law that is still upholding the Saudi social
structure. Consequently, the state and the family can be a source of protection but also
a source of repression for Saudi women (Joseph, 2005: 154, 158, 164; Altorki, 2000:
236; Manea, 2008: 24).
2.2. Feminism and Islamic Feminism
Feminism, on the one hand, believes in economic, social and political equality between
the genders. It is a political engagement concerned with questions of power in the sense
of relations of subordination, capacity, ability and opportunity to be able to control the
conditions of personal existence. Moreover, it is also an ethical commitment that opposes
the patriarchy or, in other words, the social construct of male supremacy and thus the
domination of women by men.
5
In other words, feminism recognizes and criticizes male
supremacy and strives to change this system. As the feminist theory was born out of the
movement to promote women’s rights and the willingness to empower women worldwide,
it fights against women’s exclusion from highly valued forms of life, such as positions of
power and influence; against women’s confined roles of support to men, such as mothers,
wives and reproductive partners; and against the silencing of women’s interests on behalf
of men’s benefit. In this sense, feminism focuses on gender inequality through women’s
experiences, social roles and relations with men while identifying the patriarchy, sexism,
gender equality, women’s liberation and oppression, among other concerns, as their
central preoccupations (Al Alhareth et al., 2015: 121; Thompson, 1994: 173-174, 176-
178).
Islamic feminism, on the other hand, is one of the many dimensions that form the concept
of feminism. It uses the ideology of feminism as its foundation but tries to operate within
the Islamic values with the purpose of changing the stereotypical social roles tied to
Islamic women. In other words, Islamic feminism suggests social benefits and the
5
It is noteworthy that feminism is not exclusive to women and that not all men are motivated by the mastery
over women. In fact, it also seeks to empower men who fall victim to male domination and who are
oppressed by male supremacy (Thompson, 1994: 173).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
56
enhancement of opportunities for women in a culturally satisfactory and sustainable
manner, and aims for the empowerment of women, social justice and gender equality all
while viewing issues such as politics, dressing, religious practices and public life from an
Islamic perspective (Al Alhareth et al., 2015: 122; Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 48).
2.3. Sophia, the robot
Regarding Sophia, it is an artificially intelligent humanoid robot developed by Hanson
Robotics, an American company based in Hong Kong, in cooperation with SingularityNET
and Alphabet, Google’s parent company. Activated in April of 2015, Sophia has not only
the appearance of a middle-aged woman, it also recognizes voices and faces, is able to
replicate 62 different facial expressions as well as human emotions, and to articulate as
it speaks by means of its electronic synthetic voice system. In fact, Sophia’s creators
wanted to enable the robot to maintain, on its own, an intelligent conversation with
human beings on any given topic and allow the robot to accompany its dialogue with the
suitable emotional expression. Thus, the most human-like feature that Sophia possesses
is its ability to learn from its interaction and experiences with different interlocutors,
which enables it to accustom itself with the different emotions, linguistic styles, feelings
but also cultures of the people it interacts with. Sophia’s emotive, communicative and
linguistic abilities have even enabled it to be named the first Innovation Champion of the
United Nations Development Programme. Consequently, Sophia is the first non-human
being to be granted a UN title as well as an official citizenship status and is said to have
marked the start of a new technological era (Retto, 2017: 3, 6-7; Pagallo, 2018: 232).
3. Case study
3.1. Saudi activists’ role in the acquisition of gender equality
In the meantime, the interrelation between politics and religion in Saudi Arabia results
in significant gender disparities. The national religious establishments support the
oppressive decrees and laws imposed on Saudi women while the endorsement of charters
against women’s discrimination is often seen as a form of Western dominance and a
threat to the Islamic system. Accordingly, the situation in the Petrostate is far from being
in compliance with any international standards regarding women’s rights even though it
has ratified treaties about this matter. Through the ratification of the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in 2000, for instance,
the Kingdom is contractually and legally bound to ensure that women’s rights are
protected as well as being promoted on national territory (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 33;
Mtango, 2004: 50-51, 63). Nonetheless, gender equality, including Saudi women’s rights
and citizenship status, is being undermined in the name of religion. Saudi women are
continuously categorized as second-class citizens, have to endure legal as well as cultural
prohibitions and struggle against the old Saudi customs, inequality, discrimination,
double standards between women and men and an extension of their stereotypical roles
(Van Engeland-Nourai, 2009: 392; Joseph, 2005: 151; Mtango, 2004: 51, 57).
As Islamic feminism is still not supported in Saudi Arabia and Islamic societies often see
these types of concepts as an assault to their religion and a secular ideology from the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
57
West, shifts in gender dynamics are often discarded (Al Alhareth et al., 2015: 122). This
demonstrates that considerable political and legal reforms as well as overall social change
are required to improve Saudi women’s status, and it also solidifies the importance of
Saudi women’s role as activists in the acquisition of gender equality (Mtango, 2004: 51).
In fact, a growing number of advocates and journalists in Saudi Arabia have been slowly
pushing the social boundaries and demanding an increase of women’s rights. Already
back in 2007, for instance, the Committee for Women’s Right to Drive started a petition
encouraging the government as well as the king to re-evaluate the driving ban imposed
on Saudi women (Kelly, 2009: 6). This protest continued in 2011, when the official
campaign “Women2Drive” was launched by female activists in order to mobilize support
against the ban (Rijal and Khoirina, 2019: 442).
Even though Saudi women were finally granted the right to drive in 2018, these types of
regulations seem to only be valid in theory. In fact, when new reforms are implemented,
they are usually accompanied by further restrictions and they hardly ever affect how the
civil society behaves or functions. This statement can be observed in at least two different
instances. In the first place, concerning Saudi women’s right to drive and obtain a driving
license, Saudi authorities implemented a new regulation allowing their male guardians to
oppose this newly acquired right. Moreover, not only are there only a few driving schools
that accept Saudi women, these schools are usually also more expensive for Saudi
women than for Saudi men (Dousseki, 2019; Reuters, 2019). Secondly, alongside the
restrictions to their right to drive, when a new regulation regarding women’s right to
travel freely without their male guardian’s permission was announced, the Saudi
authorities’imposed, once again, additional limitations. On the one hand, the reform only
allowed women over the age of 21 to travel freely, which means that women under this
age limit still need their guardian’s permission to do so. On the other hand, this regulation
does not explicitly specify that the right to travel abroad is also included which enables
male guardians to prevent their female family members to travel outside of the Saudi
Arabian borders (HRW, 2019).
Generally, activism in Saudi Arabia raises backlash. Hence, some journalists prefer to
refrain from meeting up with Saudi activists, while other pro-governmental news outlets
mock their protests in opinion columns and even accuse these women of betrayal as well
as of being a threat for Saudi Arabia’s unity, security and stability (Zoeff, 2011; Vilela
Fernandes, 2020: 49). However, the challenges faced by Saudi activists do not end here.
In fact, several human rights organizations have already come forward and accused the
Saudi regime of repressing political activism (20 minutes, 2019). This being said, one of
the main impediments to their activities and to the expansion of women’s rights are the
restrictions imposed on civic organizations. In other words, Saudi activists are unable to
organize or to simply voice their opinions and demands without fear of being persecuted
(Kelly, 2009: 6). In fact, the manner in which the Saudi authorities react to and deal with
women’s rights activists proves how challenging it is to apply Islamic feminism in Saudi
Arabia (HRW, 2019; Dousseki, 2019).
Although the Saudi authorities and the Saudi government have been initiating reforms in
favor of Saudi women’s rights, female Saudi activists have not had the privilege to be
treated under the same standards. On the contrary and contradictorily, female Saudi
political activists who have been protesting for the deployment of these same reforms,
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
58
together with the journalists that support them, have been imprisoned based on overall
dubious allegations or simply because the local authorities considered their behaviors as
a violation of the current Saudi law. It is relevant to highlight that these imprisonments
take place even in cases of demands to abolish the guardianship system, pacific initiatives
regarding the promotion of women’s rights and communication with international
organizations. They remain in detention until they are called to present themselves in a
criminal court where they can face punishments such as travel bans or even up to 20
years in prison for their peaceful activism (HRW, 2019; Amnesty International, 2019;
Dousseki, 2019). So, for instance, when in 2018 women were finally granted the right to
drive, the Kingdom almost simultaneously started a repressive campaign against
women’s rights activists. These women were detained, had no access to lawyers and
some even testified being victims of sexual harassment and torture during their arrest
(Amnesty International, 2019; Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 48). These allegations were
confirmed by their families and even by international human rights organizations, such
as Human Rights Watch (HRW) that released a statement concerning the treatment of
imprisoned Saudi women where they exposed that the Saudi authorities had allegedly
subjected them to electric shocks, lashes on the thighs and sexual assault (Dousseki,
2019).
Despite the great attention Saudi women’s efforts have received internationally, with
international organizations, such as Amnesty International, the American Congress and
several Members of the European Parliament involving themselves on several occasions
to call for the release of these activists and to condemn the Saudi guardianship system,
their demands were not met with success. On top of that, Crown Prince Mohammed bin
Salman, along with his supporters, denies these women any credit for the implemented
changes, which once again reflects the misogyny within the Saudi system. This “caution”
on their behalf can be explained by their fear of internal threats to their regime. In other
words, if the Saudi government allowed their population to believe that significant
changes such as these happened thanks to the continuous efforts of Saudi activists, the
Saudi population would grow more self-aware and prone to revolutions demanding a
constitutional monarchy, democracy and political representation which would threaten
the existence of their authoritarian regime (Amnesty International, 2019; Doussek,
2019; BBC, 2019; Lorena, 2018). Hence, by granting small liberties to the Saudi society
but tightening the overall control, the government makes it very clear that they do not
tolerate any type of objection to their decisions (Volksstimme, 2019). This controversial
behavior on behalf of the Saudi authorities shows, on the one hand, that the government
suffers from the social as well as political pressure Islamists put upon it and, on the other
hand, that the royal family struggles to balance their supporters’ expectations on
preserving the social order and Saudi women’s demands for equal, more progressive
rights (Van Engeland-Nourai, 2009: 392; Doumato, 1999: 582).
3.2. Sophia, the robot: citizenship process, status and liberties
The paradox of enrolling a female-looking non-human being as an official citizen in a
country where women are constantly fighting for equal rights and their recognition as
citizens has generated many debates regarding Sophia's status. In other words, we are
facing the paradoxical case of a machine being granted the citizenship status in contrast
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
59
to another person or sentient being. Accordingly, it is necessary to explain how this
concession was possible and why the robot was granted the Saudi citizenship.
When closely examining the legal aspects of Sophia’s citizenship process, several
contradictions to the current Saudi Arabian laws can be pointed out. In fact, a human
being wanting to acquire the Saudi citizenship would have had to apply for this status;
be born into a traditional Saudi family; marry a Saudi citizen; and/or possess the
necessary qualifications of eligibility to obtain the Saudi citizenship, such as a permanent
residence permit, having settled for over 10 years in Saudi Arabia, the legal age
requirement, and/or fluency of the national language. Based on these requirements and
procedures imposed by the Saudi Arabian Citizenship System and Nationality Regulations
that the robot did not meet nor follow, and based on the fact that Sophia is a machine
and not a gendered person, it should not have been granted the citizenship status
(Atabekov and Yastrebov, 2018: 775-777).
Although the Saudi Culture and Information Ministry confirmed the citizenship status
without stating the benefits the robot would enjoy along with this status, it is nevertheless
possible to demonstrate that the Kingdom is opening exceptions for a machine and
allowing it certain liberties while depriving humans (Saudi women) from these same
liberties. So, even though Sophia is clearly a machine, if we take into consideration the
gender it is supposed to represent, we can observe that the female-looking robot failed
to comply with the Saudi norms of conduct that are imposed on Saudi women on a daily
basis. In other words, Sophia’s behavior while in the Petrostate deviates vastly from the
accepted model of behavior for Saudi women. For one, although Saudi women are
required by the government to wear the Islamic veil most of the time, the humanoid
robot presented itself without an abaaya during the Summit on Future Investment
Initiative. Moreover, the female-looking humanoid robot also went against the strict male
guardianship requirements that are imposed on Saudi women by being in public without
a male guardian. While both of these infringements on behalf of Sophia would have lead
Saudi women to be brought to administrative and criminal responsibility under the
current Saudi legislation, the robot did not face any consequences for breaking the rules.
Considering these aspects of Sophia’s citizenship process, it comes to no surprise that
this specific case has received extensive media coverage and that it has been widely
criticized, especially by Western media outlets. In fact, Western journalists have pointed
out how the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is equating a robot to human beings and how Saudi
Arabia is even seemingly elevating the robot over Saudi women (Atabekov and
Yastrebov, 2018: 776-777; Sini, 2017; Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 50-53).
The question that remains to be tackled in this section is why Sophia was granted the
Saudi citizenship when it should actually have been refused this privilege based on the
lack of fulfilled requirements. Was this ceremony a simple but highly effective publicity
stunt given the massive amount of media attention that Sophia already had or was this
decision rather founded on strategic reasons? On this note, David Hanson, the founder
and Chief Executive Officer of Hanson Robotics, mentioned that he initially wanted to
reject Sophia’s Saudi citizenship due to its rightful provocative and controversial nature.
However, after discussing the possible opportunities with his Chief Marketing Officer, they
decided to embrace this status based on David Hanson’s conviction that all potential
sentient beings deserve respect as well as their corresponding rights because the ultimate
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
60
goal is the creation of sentient machines. Consequently, they made Sophia an advocate
for the rights of all sentient beings and more specifically for women’s rights in the Middle
East. Hence, Sophia kept the Saudi citizenship first and foremost because nobody
declined or revoked it.
Another reason that can be pointed out as an explanation as to why Sophia was granted
the Saudi citizenship derives from a business perspective. As a matter of fact, awarding
Sophia with the citizenship status can be interpreted as a way of economical
diversification through robotics. Thus, by doing so, Saudi Arabia projects the image of a
future driven country that is open to innovation as well as new technologies and that is
capable of engaging in the modernization of its society as well as economy with the end
goal of attracting foreign investment. Following this logic of economical and societal
modernization, Sophia’s citizenship can be tied to the willingness of establishing a more
progressive agenda for their future, especially in terms of more expansive human rights.
In this sense, the Saudi reform program Vision 2030 is a good indicator that
demonstrates how the government is trying to balance a progressive stance in favor of
women’s rights and the expectations of the conservative establishments without
upsetting them or losing their support. Since the traditional and patriarchal part of the
Saudi society has proven to be an obstacle regarding the implementation of progressive
women’s rights, the Kingdom might have resorted to granting citizenship to a humanoid
female-looking robot in order to sensitize the conservative minds within their population
to the idea of equal women’s rights and to prepare them for future changes (Vilela
Fernandes, 2020: 64-65).
6
3.3. Saudi women and Sophia: comparison
Overall, instead of being a deeply thought out process with a fixed meaning, Sophia’s
citizenship is random and flexible, and nobody really knows what this status entails.
Accordingly, only three aspects are currently certain:
1) First of all, Saudi Arabia is presenting a lack of coherence between the liberties
granted to a female-looking robot and the rights that Saudi women possess. Even
though Saudi women’s rights have slightly evolved over the last few years, Sophia
still enjoys more liberties than them. In fact, when relating the proposed framework
for the concept of citizenship to this case, two major differences can be pointed out.
On the one hand, the framework establishes that citizens are individuals who
defend their rights, duties and interests within their society. However, Saudi
women are being impeded to voice their demands or communicate with
international organizations, are being imprisoned based on dubious allegations
as well as under inhumane conditions, and their political activism as well as
peaceful protests are being repressed by the Saudi regime. By contrast, if
considered as an example of a gendered person instead of a machine, although
the female-looking robot’s behavior deviated vastly from the accepted behavioral
6
Saudi officials have been arguing that the failure to end women’s discrimination and the slow progression
of these reforms are not due to state policy but rather to their overall conservative culture, the strict
interpretations of the Islamic law by the powerful clerical establishments, and the difficulties that these
factors represent in implementing measures in favor of women’s rights (Vilela Fernandes, 2020: 65, 69).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
61
model, Sophia was not brought to administrative or criminal responsibility under
the current Saudi legislation for its infringements against the local norms of
conduct.
On the other hand, the framework of citizenship also refers to a set of social,
civic, political and economic rights that are inherent to all human beings without
discrimination. However, Saudi women are subjected to oppressive decrees and
laws that categorize them as second-class citizens, impose legal and cultural
prohibitions upon them, and undermine gender equality, their rights as well as
their citizenship status in the name of religion. Their status is limited to the roles
of mothers and wives who have to be controlled by men. Thus, they are being
averted from practicing their rights and full potential as citizens. However, if
again considered as an example of a gendered person, Sophia did not have to
follow the same prohibitions. Instead, the robot did not have to cover itself,
presented itself alone in public without a male guardian, did not need to follow
any legal procedures in order to be granted the Saudi citizenship and its process
was met with far more ease and speed than any human migrant worker who
applied for the same status and has been living in the Kingdom their entire life
(Sini, 2017).
2) Secondly, as the Saudi government has not yet officially stated which rights Sophia
has been granted along with its citizenship, the meaning of Sophia’s citizenship status
will most probably fluctuate over time as the Saudi leaders and officials have the
possibility of varying its meaning at any point in time.
3) Finally, the incoherence of granting a machine more liberties than Saudi women can
be due to two different reasons. Sophia did not face any consequences either because
the decision to declare it a citizen was directly made by the appointing authorities
instead of being implemented due to civilian protests; or because, despite its status,
Sophia is still considered a property/machine rather than a citizen or sentient being
and is thus not held to the same expectations as Saudi women. In other words, when
taking the reasons why Sophia was declared an official citizen into consideration and
when bearing in mind that its rights have not yet been officially established, Sophia
seems to still be treated as a mere property rather than as a real citizen (Vilela
Fernandes, 2020: 65-68).
Conclusion
The objectives of this article have mainly concerned the evaluation of Sophia’s rights and
citizenship status in Saudi Arabia; the exploration of Saudi women activists’ struggles
against the local authorities and their role in the acquisition of their basic rights; the
comparison of Sophia and Saudi women; and the demonstration of how the local
authorities deal with protests. These objectives and the subsequent information lead to
an answer to the presented research question: “How can a female-looking robot get more
liberties than women in Saudi Arabia?”
Although developments concerning the progression of Saudi women’s rights can be
observed, it takes a long time for them to be implemented, as shown with the example
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
62
of the Women2Drive campaign. While it evidences that the Saudi government is willing
to implement changes, it also stresses how the delay in the concession of rights to Saudi
women can be traced back to the very traditional and patriarchal establishments that
rule the Saudi society. In fact, as mentioned before, the Saudi government is put under
pressure by, on the one hand, Saudi women and their expectations for equal as well as
more progressive rights, and, on the other hand, by the Islamists who expect the
government to maintain the current social order as well as the guardianship system.
Hence, based on the lack of coherence between Sophia’s and Saudi women’s freedom, it
has been established that the Kingdom is making exceptions for a machine that it is not
yet willing to make for humans (Saudi women).
In this context, and to reply to the research question, one of the main reasons why
Sophia was granted the Saudi citizenship is linked to the Kingdom’s willingness of
portraying the image of a progressive and future-driven country. In other words, the
Kingdom resorted to robot citizenship as one of the means to portray economical
diversification and the modernization of their country. However, by providing a better
understanding of Saudi women’s and especially Saudi activists’ current situation, the
present article shows how the portrayed image contradicts their actual behavior and
actions. In fact, the Petrostate still clings onto conservative social values that subject
women to oppressive decrees and laws categorizing them as second-class citizens, that
impose legal and cultural prohibitions upon them, and that undermine gender equality,
their rights as well as their citizenship status in the name of religion. This being said,
Saudi Arabia has still a lot of work ahead in order to comply with the progressive image
they want to project and to completely shed their reputation as one of the most restrictive
countries on women’s rights.
References
20minutes (2019). Les femmes saoudiennes autorisées à intégrer l’armée pour la
première fois.20minutes. Accessed on 15 Mar. 2021. Available at:
https://www.20minutes.fr/monde/2625707-20191011-arabie-saoudite-femmes-
autorisees-integrer-armee-premiere-fois
Al Alhareth, Y., Al Alhareth, Y. and Al Dighrir, I. (2015). Review of Women and Society
in Saudi Arabia. American Journal of Educational Research, 3(2), 121125. Available at:
http://pubs.sciepub.com/education/3/2/3/.
Altorki, S. (2000). The Concept and Practice of Citizenship in Saudi Arabia. In: Gender
and Citizenship in the Middle East. Syracuse University Press, 215236.
Amnesty International (2019). Amnesty International. [online] Amnesty.org. Accessed
on 15 Mar. 2021. Available at:
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/08/saudi-arabia-womens-rights-
reforms-must-be-followed-by-release-of-detained-activists/
Atabekov, A. and Yastrebov, O. (2018). Legal Status of Artificial Intelligence Across
Countries: Legislation on the Move. European Research Studies Journa, 21(4), 773782.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
63
BBC (2019). Saudi Arabia allows women to travel independently. BBC News. 2 Aug.
Accessed on 12 Apr. 2021. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-
49201019].
Chikhale, S.N. and Gohad, D.V. (2018). Multidimensional Construct About The Robot
Citizenship Law’s In Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Innovative Research and
Advanced Studies (IJIRAS), 5(1), pp.106108.
Coleman, I. (2004). The Payoff from Women’s Rights. Foreign Affairs, 83(3), pp.8095.
Doumato, E.A. (1999). Women and Work in Saudi Arabia: How Flexible Are Islamic
Margins? The Middle East Journal, 53(4), pp.568583.
Dousseki, B. (2019). En Arabie saoudite, les femmes peuvent conduire mais les
féministes vont en prison. L’Obs. Accessed on 12 Apr. 2021. Available at:
https://www.nouvelobs.com/monde/20190625.OBS14916/en-arabie-saoudite-les-
femmes-peuvent-conduire-mais-les-feministes-vont-en-prison.html
Estes, A.C. (2017). Saudi Arabia’s Robot Love Is Getting Weird. Gizmodo. Accessed 15
Mar. 2021.Available at: https://gizmodo.com/saudi-arabias-robot-love-is-getting-weird-
1819874821
HRW (2019). Saudi Arabia: Travel Restrictions on Saudi Women Lifted. Human Rights
Watch. Accessed on 9 May 2021.Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/22/saudi-arabia-travel-restrictions-saudi-women-
lifted
Joseph, S. (2005). The Kin Contract and Citizenship in the Middle East. In: Women and
Citizenship. Oxford University Press, pp.149169.
Kelly, S. (2009). Recent gains and new opportunities for women’s rights in the Gulf Arab
states. Women’s Rights in the Middle East and North Africa: Gulf Edition, (1-8).
Lorena, S. (2018). Ainda não são livres, mas agora as sauditas podem conduzir.
PÚBLICO. Accessed on 12 Apr. 2021. Available at:
https://www.publico.pt/2018/06/23/mundo/noticia/ainda-nao-sao-livres-mas-agora-
as-sauditas-ja-podem-conduzir-1835668
Manea, E. (2008). The Arab State and Women’s Rights: The Case of Saudi Arabia. The
Limits of the Possible. Orient, 2, pp.1525.
Mtango, S. (2004). A State of Oppression? Women’s Rights in Saudi Arabia. Asia-Pacific
Journal on Human Rights and the Law, 5(1), pp.4967.
Pagallo, U. (2018). Vital, Sophia, and Co.The Quest for the Legal Personhood of Robots.
Information, 9(9), pp.230240.
Retto, J. (2017). Sophia, first citizen robot of the world. ResearchGate. Available at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321319964_SOPHIA_FIRST_CITIZEN_ROBO
T_OF_THE_WORLD.
Reuters (2019). O que podem e não podem fazer as mulheres sauditas? [online] Público.
Accessed on 9 May 2021.Available at:
https://www.publico.pt/2019/08/02/impar/noticia/podem-nao-podem-mulheres-
sauditas-1882199
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL12 N2, TD2
Thematic dossier The Middle East. Local Dynamics, regional actors, global challenges
February 2022, pp. 51-64
Robot citizenship and gender (in)equality: the case of Sophia the robot in Saudi Arabia
Joana Vilela Fernandes
64
Rijal, N.K. and Khoirina, R.Z. (2019). The Roles of Civil Society to Changing of Women
Driving Policy In Saudi Arabia: The Case of Women2Drive Campaign. Islamic World and
Politics, 3(1), pp.435447.
Sini, R. (2017). Does Saudi robot citizen have more rights than women? BBC News.
[online] 26 Oct. Accessed on 9 May 2021. Available at:
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-41761856
Thompson, D. (1994). Defining feminism. Australian Feminist Studies, 9(20), pp.171
192.
Van Engeland-Nourai, A. (2009). On the Path to Equal Citizenship and Gender Equality:
Political, Judicial, and Legal Empowerment of Muslim Women. In: Gender Equality:
Dimensions of Women’s Equal Citizenship. Cambridge University Press, pp.390408.
Vilela Fernandes, J. (2020). Robot citizenship and women’s rights: the case of Sophia the
robot in Saudi Arabia. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10071/21106.
Volksstimme (2019). Mehr Frauenrechte in Saudi-Arabien. www.volksstimme.de.
Accessed on 27 Apr. 2021. Available at: https://www.volksstimme.de/deutschland-
welt/politik/wandel-mehr-frauenrechte-in-saudi-arabien
Zoeff, K. (2014). Talk of Women’s Rights Divides Saudi Arabia. [online] Steal | this |
Hijab . Accessed on 4 Feb. 2021.Available at:
https://stealthishijab.com/2011/10/10/talk-of-women%E2%80%99s-rights-divides-
saudi-arabia/