I was approached by Apple's senior manager of government affairs, and we discussed a couple of obstacles that Apple is facing in Saudi. These are about tracking parallel imports and simplifying the customs process. A letter from their side was sent to explain the case in more details. Apple claims that such obstacles are harming the viability of their investment, distorting competition, creating barriers to trade, unfairly impacting compliant suppliers and ultimately hampering the customer experience in Saudi.

The team have done a first round of investigation for better understanding. The outcome can be summarizesd as follows;:

Apple is making a compelling point with regard to their right not to suffer from those who are in the practice of importing their products through parallel means,. and tThis is backed up mainly by Article 21 of the Copyright Law, which prevents the unauthorized use of copyrighted products and of the sale of copies of the same. This provision of the Law has quite clearly, toas thefar beast it can be understood, not been employed by the Government to deny the entry of parallel imports. The implementation of such measures should not be too challenging, as I understooand it is already in place with the customs department for incidents that are found to be infringing on trademarks, and while this is not infringement per se, the same mechanisms can apply.

On the other hand, there is also a competition law angle to be explored, as the exclusive channelling of products through a few vendors may create a document position or a cartel (price fixing) scenario.

With regards to simplifying customs procedures, the Customs Law does states the requirement for certificates of origin and conformity, and its text is unclear as to the number of times such certificates are required, and if they can be asked for each time or only once. In all cases the Llaw seems to leave a lot of flexibility with the president of the customs department regarding these requirements, and again, the solution may be simple.

Further evidence tof this is exemplified by the fact that Saudi and the UAE are subject to the same GCC customs law, but the UAE have dropped the requirement to request the certificate of conformity each time (according to Apple) and therefore KSA should be able to as well.

However, without understanding the true driverasons that the customs department foris asking for these documents each time, we cannot elaborate on the correctness of such an action.

Allow me, Your Excellency, to propose that since the case is not new nor bounded, we can consider it as part of the "Removing Obstacles" file", in which a letter (برقية) is to be sent to the customs to check on the current status of such. This will help the team to build the case and set the directimonve forward to resolve it. OThe other option, Y.E., is to communicate with the Minster of Commerce and Investment, since H.E. is leading the RO executive committee, and such communication can be from H.E.his side.


Looking forward ….

As discussed yesterday, today is the last day for Dr. Khalid Al Dakkan's inlast day at MEP, and until now, the ministry didhas not yet named a new accountable for the r"Removing oObstacles" project. STherefore, I do suggest to contacting Dr. Ibrahim Babili, who is the business owner for the project, in order to ask him to name a new accountable and to understand his plan for this file.

I hope this email finds you very well.

As discussed yesterday, Dr. Khalid Al Dakkan's last day at MEP is today, and up until now, the ministry didhas not spyecifyt named a new accountable for the r"Removing oObstacles" file. And fFor that I suggest to contacting Dr. Ibrahim Babilli, asthe business owner for the file in order, to align with him about who is going to be the new accountable withat whom I need to be working with him ion this file. So please advise if you would like to get in touch with him,. oOtherwise, I can ask him directly.

Looking forward to hearing from you…