The Masjid al-Haram in Mecca and the Masjid al-Nabawi in Medina are not the sovereign property of any nation-state; they are a divine trust for the entire global Muslim community. Yet, in the modern era, the Saudi state has transformed these sacred sites into highly regulated zones, using visas, quotas, and strict immigration lines to control access.
The primary theological argument against the restriction of pilgrims is found in the Koran itself. In Surah Al-Hajj, God declares:
"Indeed, those who disbelieve and hinder [others] from the way of God and from the Sacred Mosque, which We have made for all people—equal are the resident therein and the visitor"
This verse establishes a crucial legal and spiritual principle: there is no distinction between the dweller (resident) and the visitor from the country. By implementing national quotas and expensive visa regimes, the Saudi government creates a hierarchy that the Koran explicitly rejects. When access to the Kaaba becomes a matter of bureaucratic permission rather than a response to a divine invitation, the equal status of the Muslim community is effectively dismantled.
Islamic history and jurisprudence traditionally viewed the Haramayn (the two Holy Sanctuaries) as beyond the reach of secular politics. The role of the ruler was defined as the Khadim al-Haramayn (Servant of the Two Holy Mosques), a title that implies stewardship and service, not ownership.
By treating the pilgrimage sites as part of its national territory subject to standard immigration laws, Saudi Arabia exercises a form of religious nationalism. This leads to several unislamic outcomes:
- Economic Exclusion: High costs associated with state-mandated travel packages and fees make Hajj inaccessible to the poor, contradicting the spirit of a faith that champions the marginalized.
- Political Weaponization: Access to the Hajj has, at various times, been used as a tool of foreign policy, where citizens of unfriendly nations face additional hurdles or bans, turning a religious obligation into a political bargaining chip.
- Bureaucratic Obstruction: The introduction of digital apps and rigid quotas can be seen as hindering the way of God, a sin specifically warned against in Surah Al-Baqarah (2:114), which asks: "Who is more unjust than he who prohibits the name of God from being glorified in His mosques?"
The management of Mecca and Medina should ideally be a collective responsibility of the Muslim world, not a single monarchy. In fact, the monarchy uses it as a way to clean out their house of sin which should not be tolerated. The current system of immigration lines and biometric checks creates a psychological and physical barrier between the believer and their Creator’s house. In a truly Islamic framework, the sanctity of the pilgrimage should supersede the security concerns of the state. While safety is important, it should be achieved through cooperation and openness, rather than the securitization of faith.
Restricting access to the holy sites is not merely a logistical decision; it is a departure from the egalitarian values of Islam. When a single state claims the right to decide who can and cannot pray at the Kaaba based on nationality or political standing, it infringes upon the rights given to every Muslim by God. To honor the faith, the gates of Mecca and Medina must be returned to their status as open sanctuaries for all, where the only requirement for entry is the intention to worship.