المملكة: The new implementation system: immediate seizure of funds, daily fines, and travel bans to force the debtor to pay – urgent

The Council of Ministers approved The new implementation systemis in an expanded form that reshapes the mechanisms for fulfilling judicial rights, by granting the courts comprehensive powers to supervise implementation and adjudicate disputes, while adopting an integrated supervisory and executive system that relies on the mandatory disclosure of funds, accelerating implementation orders, and activating immediate seizure, in addition to deterrent tools that include daily fines, travel bans, tracking assets, and prosecuting concealment and smuggling attempts.

The regime confirmed that if the executive document fulfills its conditions, it will be issued. The court orders the execution and the person against whom it is executed is notified immediately, and if notification is not possible, it is announced by the appropriate means, with the effects of the notification taking effect from the date of the announcement, which ensures that the procedures are not disrupted due to the inability to reach the debtor.

Disclosing funds and combating their concealment

The system obliges the person against whom the execution is being executed to disclose his funds immediately upon being notified of the execution order or announcing it. It also granted the court the authority to issue orders to disclose funds based on the request of the person seeking execution, in the event that there is evidence of concealment or smuggling of funds.

This included obligating the agents of the person executing against him, his employees, and those dealing with him financially, in addition to his debtors or those suspected of favoring him, to disclose the funds, along with the parties that hold funds belonging to him.

In an extension of the fundamental amendments included in the new implementation system, subsequent articles revealed an expanded package. Among the strict procedures and regulatory mechanisms aimed at tightening control over the funds of those perpetrated against them, and accelerating the pace of fulfilling rights, by activating mandatory disclosure, expanding the scope of forced enforcement, and approving deterrent tools that include daily fines, travel bans, and tracking of funds inside and outside the country.

A specific deadline for disclosure and obliging the authorities to provide data

The system confirmed that disclosing funds is no longer an option, but rather a fixed-term legal obligation, as it obliges everyone who is asked to disclose to respond within a period not exceeding ten days. working days from the date of his notification, through the means specified by the executive regulations.

It also obliges the authorities supervising or registering funds to provide the court with the data and information they have within only three working days from the date of their request, which reflects a clear trend towards accelerating the flow of information and preventing disruption of implementation procedures.

In the same context, the system obligated these authorities to establish specialized departments to process implementation orders and decisions, prepare accurate databases for the ownership of fixed and movable funds, in addition to enabling electronic connectivity with the ministry’s systems, in order to enhance Digital integration and limits manipulation or concealment of assets.

The system did not neglect the international dimension, as it organized the exchange of disclosure of funds with other countries on the basis of reciprocity, with an emphasis that this be within the limits of achieving the purpose without compromising national security, which reflects a balance between international cooperation and the protection of sovereignty.

Forcible execution begins after a short notice

The system sets a strict time frame for the start of forced execution procedures, as these procedures begin immediately after five working days have passed from the date of notification of the person being executed against. With the execution order without his compliance, unless he provides a sufficient bank guarantee, in which case he is granted an additional grace period not exceeding ten working days.

Forcible execution procedures include notifying the competent authorities to record the incident of non-execution in the credit records, in addition to seizing the executor’s current and future funds, including his dues to public authorities, which constitutes direct pressure that pushes towards speedy compliance.

Daily fines amounting to thousands of riyals

Among the most prominent deterrent tools that The system approved the imposition of a daily financial fine on the enforcer who procrastinates in implementation, not to exceed five thousand riyals for each day of delay, provided that the regulations determine its amount, while granting the court the power to cancel it in whole or in part if the debtor commits to implementation.

These fines are collected after the completion of the distribution of the implementation proceeds, and they go completely to the state treasury.

Travel ban as an escalation measure

And in a clear escalation. For the procedures, the system authorized the court to issue an order preventing the person against whom the execution was carried out from traveling outside the country for a period of up to three years, extendable up to six years, upon the request of the person requesting the execution.

However, the system established humanitarian and professional controls to lift this ban, such as the need for treatment outside the country, or if the nature of the debtor’s work requires travel, or if the debt is of limited value, or if sufficient funds are disclosed to pay off the debt.

He stressed that this procedure does not conflict with The powers of the competent authorities regarding the residence or deportation of non-citizens.

Tracking funds and prosecuting concealment attempts

In a step aimed at combating fraud, the system granted the court the power to track the funds executed against him in the event that there are indications that they were hidden or smuggled, based on the request of the execution applicant, with tracking costs considered part of the implementation expenses.

The system also allowed the execution applicant to view data and information related to the debtor’s funds, within the limits of achieving the purpose of implementation, in addition to empowering the authorities. The competent authority is able to provide those responsible for the execution with this data.

Interrogating the debtor and those around him upon suspicion

The system expanded the scope of the investigation, as it allowed the court to interrogate the person executing against him or any person suspected of involvement in concealing funds, including his relatives, agents, employees, and those dealing with him financially, obliging them to respond within three working days.

In the event of abstention, the court can issue an order to bring them by force, which reflects Strictly pursuing attempts at evasion.

Ensuring that the seizure covers all funds

The system confirmed that all the funds of the person being executed against him are considered a guarantee of his debts from the date of notifying him of the execution request, with careful organization of the seizure procedures, whether precautionary or executive, to ensure that the rights of creditors are preserved without transgression.

And the enforcement applicant is granted the right to appeal actions taken by the debtor with the intention of harming creditors, such as gifts, donations, or paying debts before date or concluding unusual financial obligations, as the court can invalidate these actions within the limits of the value of the debt, and even consider them completely invalid if they take place after the issuance of the seizure order.

Determining the scope of the seizure and ensuring balance

The system established precise controls for seizure, as it may not exceed the amount of the debt, except in cases of indivisibility of money, while granting the court the power to choose the funds on which execution is to be carried out in order to achieve speedy fulfillment.

It allows the debtor to propose specific funds for execution if he has assets exceeding the value of the debt. The debt, provided that the court takes that as long as it does not harm the interest of implementation.

Humanitarian and social exceptions to seizure

Within the framework of achieving social balance, the regime excluded a number of funds from seizure, most notably public funds, the residence in which the debtor and his dependents reside, and the necessary means of transportation for them, in addition to the necessary professional and personal tools.

It also established controls for the seizure of salaries and wages, as it specified certain percentages that take into account the priority of alimony debt, in addition to regulating the seizure of Retirement pensions in specific proportions that guarantee the minimum standard of living.

Distribution of debts and control of financial benefits

The system approved a detailed mechanism for dealing with cases of debt crowding, stipulating that half of the total pension be allocated to the alimony debt, while a quarter of the remaining half is allocated to other debts, with the remainder distributed among the creditors when they are multiple, according to mechanisms specified by the executive regulations.

The system also includes government subsidies provided to the person being executed against, in addition to what is issued by a decision of the council. Ministers, as financial elements subject to the provisions of implementation, within the framework of a comprehensive regulation of recoverable sources of income.

Immediate implementation of seizure orders and the use of coercive force

The system affirmed the obligation of the authorities supervising or registering funds to implement seizure orders issued by the court immediately without delay, while granting the court the power to request the intervention of the competent force when necessary to ensure the implementation of its orders.

The executive regulations were entrusted with organizing seizure procedures, depositing funds, managing them, and guarding them, including This includes future funds that may belong to the debtor later, which reflects an expansion of the concept of executive guarantee to include current and future assets.

Criminalizing concealment and deception and referring cases to the competent authorities

The law stipulates that if evidence or evidence is available that the debtor or others have committed behavior aimed at concealing, smuggling or dissipating funds, or submitting misleading data before the court, then the incident is immediately referred to the competent authority for the investigation, without this affecting the continuation of the investigation. Enforcement procedures.

This approach comes within the framework of strengthening the criminal dimension parallel to executive procedures, ensuring that there is no escape from accountability when tampering or fraud is proven.

Regulating the sale of seized funds through public auction

With regard to the stage of selling seized funds, the system granted the court the power to enable the debtor to sell his funds voluntarily whenever this is in the interest of implementation, and otherwise the sale is carried out through public auction as a public asset.

The decision to award the auction is the decisive legal moment for the sale to take place, as it results in the final transfer of ownership, with the sold money cleared of any previous entitlements, ensuring the stability of transactions and protecting the good faith buyer.

The system regulates the sale of securities according to controls that are coordinated with the competent authorities in the money market, to ensure fair pricing and market stability, while specifying the full regulatory framework through the executive regulations.

Procedures for transferring ownership and vacating real estate

The system clarifies that the price is not delivered. Selling only after officially completing the ownership transfer procedures, ensuring the integrity of the legal process.

In the event that ownership of a property is transferred to a new buyer, he has the right to request the eviction of the property from its occupants, unless they have an executive document proving a legitimate right to remain. In the event of abstention, the court takes additional executive measures to ensure eviction in accordance with the law.

Determining responsibility for implementation expenses

The system established a clear rule that the person being executed against shall initially bear all implementation expenses, unless the court decides otherwise if the The reason for these expenses is due to another party.

The system required the execution applicant to bear these expenses in certain cases, most notably the completion of the execution request according to system-specified cases, with careful regulation of the mechanism for paying expenses, and linking the continuation of procedures to their payment, which reflects the importance of the financial aspect in completing the implementation process.

Depositing the proceeds of implementation and distributing them through an organized banking system

In an advanced regulatory step, the system stipulated the establishment of bank accounts and safe deposit boxes designated for implementation, The Ministry is responsible for managing it, depositing the proceeds of implementation therein and disbursing them according to precise controls.

If the proceeds are sufficient to satisfy the rights of all creditors, it will be distributed directly among them in accordance with what is specified by the regulations. In the event of insufficiency, first resort is made to an amicable settlement between the parties, and if this is not possible, a judicial distribution is made, taking into account the priority of senior debts.

Direct enforcement in cases of abstention and non-financial obligations

The system stipulates direct procedures if the subject of implementation is an act or an abstention, as the court grants a short period not exceeding five working days before the forced implementation begins.

In the event of continued abstention, the court can impose a daily fine of up to ten thousand riyals, in addition to To take other measures, such as banning travel, with the possibility of intervention by the competent authorities to implement the obligation subject to the executive document.

• For more: Follow Khaleejion 24 Arabic, Khaleejion 24 English, Khaleejion 24 Live, and for social media follow us on Facebook and Twitter