Telecommunications companies

Ooredoo Q.P.S.C.

Rank: 12th
Score: 14%out of 100

Headquartered in Qatar and majority-owned by the Qatari government, Ooredoo provides telecommunications services such as mobile, broadband, and fiber in 9 countries in the Middle East, North Africa, and southeast Asia. In the fourth quarter of 2025, it had 147.1 million users.

Although Ooredoo remained at the bottom of the ranking, it achieved a milestone this year as its overall score increased by over four points and moved into double digits for the first time. This gain is primarily attributed to significant progress made by the company in the governance category.

Following closely behind e&, another Gulf-based telecommunications operator, Ooredoo posted the second-largest improvement in governance performance, with its score in this area rising by more than 14 points[1]. Since 2022, Ooredoo has introduced ethical AI principles, established a top-down governance structure to oversee human rights issues, and launched a security vulnerability reporting program. However, major transparency gaps persisted in key areas, such as freedom of expression.

The company operates across complex geopolitical and human rights environments. Ooredoo Palestine is one of the two telecommunication companies operating in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. During Israel’s invasion of Gaza, Ooredoo’s infrastructures in the region were impacted severely, which caused multiple communication blackouts. With the ease of the situation, in January 2026, Israel approved Ooredoo and another mobile operator to upgrade the mobile network to 4G services for Palestinians in the West Bank. However, only 2G networks are available in the Gaza Strip so far.

In recent years, internet shutdowns recurred in some of its markets, highlighting the challenges of balancing service delivery with digital rights and compliance obligations. Moreover, internet censorship is still a significant issue in Qatar. Authorities have blocked access to Roblox, an online gaming platform since August 2025. As an internet service provider, Ooredoo did not disclose how it responds to government requests for internet content restrictions, nor did it provide data on its content filtering practices.

Human rights risks continued to be a source of investor concerns for Ooredoo. In January 2024, Norway’s KLP pension fund divested from Ooredoo, citing concerns over human rights and the energy transition following NGO consultations and human rights assessments.

Key Takeaways

  • For the first time, Ooredoo published a group human rights policy and indicated that it carries out risk assessments; however, it did not explicitly include freedom of expression or privacy within the scope of these commitments.
  • The company still did not provide any information about its processes for handling censorship or surveillance requests, nor did it release data on the volume or nature of such demands.
  • Ooredoo was not transparent about its handling of user information, disclosing nothing about the types of data it collects or infers, how long this information is retained, whether it is shared with third parties, or what options users have to access and control their data.

Recommendations

  • Detail a commitment to human rights. Ooredoo should explicitly commit to respecting users’ rights to privacy and freedom of expression, in accordance with international human rights standards. It should also implement and publicly disclose a company-wide human rights due diligence process, including regular human rights impact assessments (HRIAs).
  • Increase transparency around government censorship and surveillance. The company should publish clear policies and regular transparency reports on how it responds to government requests for network shutdowns, content restrictions, surveillance, and access to user data, including aggregate data on the volume and legal basis of such requests.
  • Improve user data protection and control. Ooredoo should significantly enhance transparency around its data practices by disclosing what user data it infers, how long it retains this data, whether and with whom it is shared, and by providing meaningful mechanisms for users to access and control their personal information.

Services evaluated:

  • Ooredoo Qatar (Prepaid mobile)
  • Ooredoo Qatar (Postpaid mobile)
  • Ooredoo Qatar (Fixed-line broadband)
  • Operating company evaluated: Ooredoo QatarFor telecommunications companies, the RDR Index evaluates relevant policies of the parent company, the operating company, and selected services of that operating company.
  • Market cap: USD 11.59B (as of May 18, 2026)
  • QSE, based in Doha: ORDS
  • Read more about how stock structures can be a barrier to shareholder participation
  • Website: https://www.ooredoo.qa

The 2026 RDR Index: Telco Giants Edition covers policies that were active on August 31, 2025. Policies that came into effect after August 31, 2025 were not evaluated for this ranking.

Scores reflect the average score across the services we evaluated, with each service weighted equally.

  • Lead researchers: Farah Rasmi, Afef Abrougui

Changes since 2022

  • Ooredoo demonstrated the second-largest improvement in governance performance among all companies evaluated. For the first time, Ooredoo disclosed ethical principles guiding its deployment and development of AI, as well as a top-down governance oversight structure on human rights issues, and stated that it provides regular employee training on privacy matters.
  • Ooredoo became more transparent in disclosing the number of privacy complaints it received, though the information remained limited.
  • The company improved the accessibility of its privacy policy for its fixed-line broadband service. It also disclosed that prepaid users are required to provide identification in order to subscribe to its services.
  • Ooredoo disclosed a new mechanism through which security researchers can submit discovered vulnerabilities and committed not to pursue legal action against researchers who comply with the company’s reporting mechanism.

Scores since 2017

100%0%2017201820192020202220265%5%5%6%9%14%
Most companies’ scores dropped between 2019 and 2020 with the inclusion of our new indicators on targeted advertising and algorithmic systems. To learn more, please visit our Methodology development archive.
Governance24%
Freedom of expression6%
Privacy17%

We rank companies on their governance, and on their policies and practices affecting freedom of expression and privacy.

Governance 24%

Ooredoo made the most improvements in its governance category, increasing its score by over 14 points. While it remained in last place in this area, it has, for the first time, outlined the ethical framework underpinning its use of artificial intelligence (G1) and clarified in its 2024 ESG Report that responsibility for privacy governance rests with both the board and senior management (G2). The company also indicated that privacy awareness is reinforced through ongoing training programs for employees (G3). While Ooredoo conducted risk assessments associated with human rights, no evidence showed that freedom of expression or privacy issues were included in the due diligence process (G4a).

Freedom of expression 6%

Ooredoo scored slightly higher on freedom of expression this year than in the previous ranking, after making it easier for customers to access the privacy policy applicable to its fixed-line broadband services (F1a). It also disclosed that individuals using prepaid services must submit identification as part of the subscription process (F11). However, Ooredoo continued to trail behind, performing only slightly better than Airtel. The company still disclosed very limited information on network shutdowns (F10). It remained silent about content, account, or advertisement restrictions (F4a, F4b, F4c), nor did it share any information related to third-party requests to block content (F5a, F5b, F6, F7).

Privacy 17%

Ooredoo made some improvements on its privacy disclosures, particularly regarding the bug bounty program for security researchers to report identified system vulnerabilities and has pledged not to take legal action against those who follow the company’s established disclosure procedures (P14). Despite this progress, it continued to rank last in this category due to the limited transparency on its privacy practices. In particular, it provided very limited information on the measures it takes to address data breaches (P15). The company offered insufficient details about how user data is managed: it failed to reveal the types of data it infers (P3b), the extent to which information is collected from third parties (P9), how long it retains user data (P6), or whether users are given any means to access or control their personal information (P7, P8).

Indicators

Footnotes

[1] This adjusted score reflects changes in company performance after excluding the effects of reassessments, corrections, and updates to research guidance, and is intended to capture only policy-related developments.