The Challenge of Multi-Jurisdiction Privacy Compliance
If your company operates in both the European Union and Saudi Arabia, you face a familiar challenge: complying with two comprehensive data protection laws that share common principles but differ in important details. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Saudi Arabia’s Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) both aim to protect individual privacy, but their requirements, enforcement mechanisms, and practical implications differ in ways that matter for your compliance programme.
Understanding where these laws align — and where they diverge — is essential for building an efficient, unified privacy programme rather than managing two separate compliance efforts.
Common Ground: Where GDPR and PDPL Align
Before diving into differences, it is worth noting the substantial overlap between the two frameworks. Both laws share:
- Core principles — Lawfulness, purpose limitation, data minimization, accuracy, storage limitation, and security are foundational to both regulations
- Data subject rights — Both grant individuals the right to access, rectify, delete, and port their personal data
- Consent requirements — Both require consent to be freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous
- Breach notification — Both require organizations to notify authorities of personal data breaches
- Extraterritorial scope — Both apply to organizations outside their jurisdiction that process the personal data of individuals within their territory
- Accountability — Both require organizations to demonstrate compliance through documentation and governance measures
This overlap means that organizations already compliant with GDPR have a strong foundation for PDPL compliance, and vice versa.
Key Differences
1. Regulatory Authority
| Aspect | GDPR | PDPL |
|---|---|---|
| Supervising authority | National Data Protection Authorities (one per EU member state) | Saudi Data and AI Authority (SDAIA) |
| Consistency mechanism | European Data Protection Board (EDPB) for cross-border coordination | Single national authority |
| Enforcement style | Decentralized across 27+ DPAs | Centralized under SDAIA |
Practical implication: GDPR enforcement varies by member state. Some DPAs are more active than others. PDPL enforcement is centralized, which may mean more consistent but less predictable enforcement patterns as the regime matures.
2. Legal Bases for Processing
Both laws define multiple legal bases for processing personal data, but the specifics differ:
GDPR provides six legal bases:
- Consent
- Contract performance
- Legal obligation
- Vital interests
- Public task
- Legitimate interests
PDPL provides similar but not identical bases:
- Consent
- Contractual necessity
- Legal obligation
- Vital interests
- Public interest
- Legitimate interests (added in implementing regulations)
Key difference: The PDPL’s treatment of legitimate interests was clarified in the implementing regulations. While both frameworks now recognize legitimate interests as a lawful basis, the balancing test and documentation expectations may differ in practice as SDAIA enforcement guidance develops.
3. Consent Standards
| Aspect | GDPR | PDPL |
|---|---|---|
| Standard | Freely given, specific, informed, unambiguous | Freely given, specific, informed, unambiguous |
| Withdrawal | Must be as easy to withdraw as to give | Can be withdrawn at any time |
| Children’s consent | Parental consent required under age 16 (member states may lower to 13) | Parental consent required for minors |
| Explicit consent for sensitive data | Required | Required |
Practical implication: The consent standards are broadly similar. However, the PDPL currently has less granular guidance on specific consent implementation patterns (such as layered consent or granular consent for multiple purposes), so organizations should apply GDPR-level rigor as a best practice.
4. Cross-Border Data Transfers
This is one of the most significant areas of divergence:
GDPR has established mechanisms:
- Adequacy decisions for specific countries
- Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs)
- Binding Corporate Rules (BCRs)
- Derogations for specific situations
PDPL restricts transfers outside Saudi Arabia and requires:
- Adequate protection in the receiving country (adequacy list to be published by SDAIA)
- Appropriate safeguards approved by SDAIA
- Specific exceptions (e.g., contract performance, vital interests, public interest)
Practical implication: As of 2026, SDAIA’s adequacy list and approved transfer mechanisms are still evolving. Companies transferring data from Saudi Arabia to the EU can likely rely on the strong alignment between the frameworks. Transfers from Saudi Arabia to other jurisdictions require careful assessment and potentially SDAIA approval.
5. Data Protection Officer Requirements
| Aspect | GDPR | PDPL |
|---|---|---|
| Mandatory DPO | Required for public authorities, large-scale processing of sensitive data, or large-scale systematic monitoring | Not explicitly mandatory; SDAIA recommends designating a responsible individual |
| Qualifications | Expert knowledge of data protection law and practices | Not specified |
| Independence | DPO must be independent, no conflict of interest | Not specified |
Practical implication: Even though PDPL does not mandate a DPO, organizations subject to both laws should appoint one to satisfy GDPR requirements and demonstrate accountability under both frameworks.
6. Data Protection Impact Assessments
| Aspect | GDPR | PDPL |
|---|---|---|
| When required | High-risk processing (profiling, large-scale sensitive data, systematic monitoring) | Processing that may harm data subjects (details in implementing regulations) |
| Content | Description of processing, necessity and proportionality assessment, risk assessment, mitigation measures | Similar scope, with specifics defined by SDAIA |
| Consultation | Must consult DPA if high risk cannot be mitigated | Must consult SDAIA in specified circumstances |
7. Penalties
| Aspect | GDPR | PDPL |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum fine | Up to 20 million EUR or 4% of annual global turnover (whichever is higher) | Up to 5 million SAR per violation (~1.3 million EUR), potentially doubled for repeat offences |
| Criminal penalties | Not directly; some member states have criminal provisions | Imprisonment possible for certain violations |
| Publication | Many DPAs publish enforcement decisions | SDAIA may publish decisions |
Practical implication: GDPR’s turnover-based fines can be significantly higher for large companies. PDPL’s criminal penalties, however, create personal liability for individuals that should not be underestimated.
Building a Unified Compliance Programme
Rather than running parallel compliance programmes, companies operating in both jurisdictions should build a unified privacy programme that meets the higher standard on each point:
1. Use GDPR as Your Baseline
In most areas, GDPR imposes the more detailed requirements. Building your programme to GDPR standards will cover the majority of PDPL requirements.
2. Layer PDPL-Specific Requirements
Add PDPL-specific elements where the law diverges from GDPR:
- Saudi-specific privacy notices and consent forms
- PDPL-specific cross-border transfer assessments
- Alignment with SDAIA guidance and any sector-specific requirements
- Arabic-language privacy documentation if you serve Saudi consumers
3. Maintain a Unified Record of Processing Activities
A single ROPA that captures all processing activities, with jurisdiction-specific fields for legal basis, transfer mechanisms, and regulatory requirements, is more efficient than separate registers.
4. Harmonize Policies
Write your data protection policies to meet the higher standard from either law. Where requirements conflict, create jurisdiction-specific annexes rather than entirely separate policy sets.
5. Coordinate Breach Response
Your incident response plan should include notification workflows for both GDPR (72-hour notification to the relevant DPA) and PDPL (notification to SDAIA as required). A single incident response team with jurisdiction-aware procedures is more effective than parallel teams.
How SeedGovernance Helps
SeedGovernance supports both GDPR and PDPL with pre-built templates, gap assessments, and control mappings that show where frameworks overlap and where they diverge. Our platform helps you build a unified compliance programme rather than duplicating effort across jurisdictions.
Take the free assessment to evaluate your readiness across both frameworks.