If we go back to the very beginning, Oman criminalised cybercrimes for the first time in the year 2001 when a new chapter on computer crimes was added to the Penal Law of 1974. This chapter was titled “Computer Crimes” and generally covered technical offences relating to illegal access, interception, and interference with computer systems as well as misuse of payment cards. The legal concepts that this chapter governed were what an ordinary person on the street would consider to be a cybercrime, i.e. a crime of a technological nature that affects the accessibility or safety of the technology we use.

Ten years after the introduction of the computer crimes chapter to the Penal Law, Oman decided in 2011 to create a standalone Cybercrime Law. This law took the technical crimes that were originally introduced in 2001 and expanded them into four chapters on infringing data and systems, misuse of technology, digital forgery and fraud, and infringement of payment cards. In addition to these technical chapters, a chapter titled “Content Crimes” was added to the law that governed matters beyond technical crimes committed by hackers and cybercriminals. This chapter criminalised misconduct that was already mostly criminalised by the Penal Law and other Omani law (such as defamation, intellectual property infringement, and pornography) when this same act was committed using technological means. Generally speaking, a content crime under the Cybercrime Law carried a heavier punishment in comparison to the same act under the original law.

The extent to which the Cybercrime Law of 2011 had to re-criminalise offences that were already captured by the Penal Law is at best questionable. The Penal Law and other Omani laws have always been worded using expansive terminology that was not tied to a specific technology and which was already used to capture criminal conduct irrespective of the medium. Furthermore, if the objective was to provide legal certainty, the Cybercrime Law could have had a single provision to confirm the application of the Penal Law to crimes committed using technological means without having to repeat the crimes one by one.

As a result of the Cybercrime Law of 2011, we ended up with a legal framework where multiple laws criminalise the same exact conduct. For example, if you insult someone using a text message, that would be a crime under the Penal Law, the Cybercrime Law, and the Telecommunications Law; if you infringe copyright on the internet, that would be a crime under the Cybercrime Law and the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Law; if you launder money on the internet, that would be a crime under the Cybercrime Law and the Law of Combating Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing, etc.

Having the same conduct be governed by multiple laws makes predicting the application of the law difficult, especially since the Cybercrime Law does not always copy the terminology found in the original law that governs the content in question. However, my biggest problem with overloading the Cybercrime Law with content crimes that are already governed by other laws is that this distracted us from focusing on what the law is actually intended to govern. While the Cybercrime Law of 2011 had five substantive chapters with four covering technical crimes and one covering this strange category of content crimes, if you look at the number of articles in each of these chapters, the chapter on content crimes on its own is bigger (14 articles) than the four other chapters combined (12 articles).

The new Cybercrime Law of 2026 that came out last month retained the same general structure of having technical crimes and content crimes, but the technical crimes are now covered by 14 substantive articles while the content crimes are now covered by 33 substantive articles. In other words, the content crimes have more than doubled in comparison to the previous law and now take up almost two thirds of the substantive provisions of the law.

It is clear that the Omani government sees the Cybercrime Law more as a law to control illegal content on the internet than a law for controlling the misuse of technology. The new law does not introduce any transformative changes to the regulation of technical crimes and pays only lip service to contemporary issues such as artificial intelligence. Instead of focusing on technological developments, the new law introduces a new lengthy section on crimes against the state—not in regard to cyberattacks made against state networks—but in regard to content published against the state, publishing news that harms state prestige, insults against heads of other states, etc. The law also doubles down on increasing the penalties for many existing content crimes.

The disparity between the punishments for technical crimes and the content crimes provides further evidence that the Cybercrime Law has lost its purpose. The Cybercrime Law should help protect us, as individuals and as a state, against cyberattacks, so you would assume that the biggest fines under this law would be designated for those technical crimes that the law is intended to control. Under the new law, if a cybercriminal wipes the data and disables the systems of a private hospital, he would be punished under article 5 of the law with a maximum punishment of a single year, but if an individual posts a tweet with misleading information during a pandemic he would be punished under article 30 of the law with a maximum punishment of 15 years, 15 times the punishment of an actual cyberattack. In fact, the highest fine for a technical crime under the new law is only 20,000 Rial Omani under article 18 (which bizarrely was actually reduced from 50,000 Rial Omani under the previous law), whereas the highest fine for a non-technical crime is 500,000 Rial Omani under article 55.

Content crimes should not go unpunished, but the Cybercrime Law is not the place for determining what ordinary people should be allowed to post on the internet. This matter is already governed by the Penal Law, the Telecommunications Law, and many other laws. The Cybercrime Law should focus on combating cyberattacks, digital fraud, and misuse of technology that affects the safety and integrity of our digital systems. The new Cybercrime Law of 2026 makes it clear that we have forgotten the purpose of this law.

The new Cybercrime Law has already entered into force. You can read it in full in English on the link below:

The regulation organises the sector into six licences: operating or managing a tourist or hotel establishment; travel and tourism offices (and branches of foreign tourism companies); tourist guidance; adventure tourism; high art performance groups in hotels and restaurants; and business tourism. The last two stand out. Adventure tourism, everything from off-road desert driving and mountain trekking to caving, canyoning, and ziplining, now has its own licence and a dedicated annex listing exactly which activities are covered. Business tourism, meaning conferences, exhibitions, and corporate incentive trips, is recognised as a licensed activity in its own right.

Under the old regulation, if the ministry sat on a licence application for 60 days, that silence counted as a rejection. The new regulation flips this; the ministry has 60 days to decide, and if it says nothing, the application is deemed accepted. For a sector that lives or dies on getting projects open, this reversal is the most consequential single change in the regulation.

Tourist guiding in English remains reserved for Omanis. Guides are split into general, locational, and specialised categories, must keep groups to no more than 30 people at a site, and are barred from discussing politics or religion or from working in military, border, or customs zones without permission. Adventure tourism operators carry the heaviest safety burden: an Omani licence-holder, a security and safety audit certificate, insurance issued inside Oman, a licensed specialist guide on every trip, risk and safety management plans, and a duty to cancel outings when bad weather is forecast.

Several licence fees have actually come down; a five-star hotel licence now costs 1,900 Rial Omani for three years, against the previous 3,200 Rial Omani for five years. Establishments still collect a 4% tourism fee for the ministry and an 8% service charge, but the service charge must now be paid out to staff in cash. Administrative fines in the regulation are capped at 6,000 OMR.

You can read the new Executive Regulation of the Tourism Law in full in English on the link below:

MCP stands for Model Context Protocol, an open standard for enabling AI agents to access external tools. General-purpose AI tools such as Claude, as well as legal-specific solutions such as Harvey, do not have access to a reliable Omani legislation database, and therefore cannot be confidently trusted when it comes to matters specific to Omani law. Decree MCP allows you to power up your Claude and Harvey accounts by connecting them to Decree directly.

Decree MCP can also be used by organisations wishing to build their own custom-made AI solutions that require access to Omani legislation. For example, if an organisation in Oman wishes to build an in-house AI-powered compliance solution that maps obligations imposed by new Omani laws to specific departments, the in-house solution can link with Decree MCP to maintain continuous access to the latest legislation. This approach can also support greater compliance with data protection requirements, as Decree MCP provides only the legal information and leaves the organisation free to process that data without Decree’s involvement.

Decree MCP is currently experimental, and usage is rate-limited while we learn how legal teams put it to work in practice. Access is available to Decree members whose subscription bundle includes Lex AI.

If your subscription includes Lex AI, you can begin connecting Decree MCP to your AI tools today at https://mcp-lr.decree.om/.

Learn more about Decree MCP on the link below:

In 2025, the Law Regulating Real Estate was a major reform of the legal framework governing the real estate sector. This new Law of the Real Estate Registry updates the legal framework for the real estate registry, in other words, the way in which real estate is registered, to be aligned with the Law Regulating Real Estate that was issued last year.

One of the key features of the new law is the incorporation of the concept of a Preliminary Real Estate Registry for off-plan projects, allowing buyers to officially record their ownership and legal rights before a building is finished, which was already introduced by the Law Regulating Real Estate. Another update includes the option to request an English-language translation of your mulkiya, the formal recognition of temporary mulkiyas, and clear rules for registering real estate gifted to minors or seized by court order.

One of the more notable additions of the new law is that it allows the Ministry of Housing and Urban Planning to outsource certain documentation functions relating to the Real Estate Registry to the private sector. The law does not provide a lot of details on the scope of this possible delegation.

Penalties for real estate fraud have also been dramatically increased. Previously, under the Statute of the Real Estate Registry, knowingly registering a false document to deprive someone of their real estate rights carried a tiny fine of just 200 Rial Omani. Now, that same offence carries a prison sentence of six months to three years, plus a fine ranging from 1,000 to 30,000 Rial Omani.

The Law of the Real Estate Registry enters into force today. You can read it in full in English on the link below:

The Legal Status of a Special Zone

The AI Special Zone is a special economic zone governed by the Law of Special Economic Zones and Free Zones, issued by Royal Decree 38/2025, exactly like the Special Economic Zone at Duqm.

A zone created by virtue of this law is granted specific benefits so that the zone is attractive to foreign investment. For example, companies doing business in the zone get up to thirty years of exemption from corporate income tax, customs exemptions for imported and exported goods, and exemptions from minimum capital requirements. Furthermore, land within the zone is allocated by lease or usufruct outside the constraints of the regular Land Law.

One of the key benefits of the zone will be the creation of a one-stop shop that handles all licensing and permits required for the operation of companies in the zone. The law places a strict deadline for issuing the licences and permits within the zone. For example, labour permits for non-Omani employees must be issued within five working days.

There are also other benefits, like a single comprehensive approval for strategic projects and residency for the owners of the company.

How will it be operated?

The law requires the AI Special Zone to be operated by an operator appointed by the Public Authority for Special Economic Zones and Free Zones. This operator has to be a company. The news outlets have reported that the government has appointed an Omani company called Afouq Investment and Development United to both establish and operate the zone.

How does it differ from IFCO?

One of the biggest announcements of the year was the establishment of the International Financial Centre of Oman, and it’s important to point out the differences between these two projects.

The AI Special Zone provides a number of specific exemptions and benefits, but it is still governed by Omani law. For example, Omanisation rules still apply in the AI Special Zone, the Commercial Companies Law also applies, and Omani courts have full jurisdiction over the zone. In particular, the Omanisation rules prohibit the hiring of non-Omani software engineers, and therefore, this prohibition will apply to companies working in the zone.

Unlike the AI Special Zone, IFCO is a totally independent legal jurisdiction in which Omani law does not apply and has its own court system. This means that the Omanisation rules categorically do not apply.

However, even though the AI Special Zone will still be bound by Omani law, the ability of the zone to attract the AI industry will depend on factors beyond the law, such as its ability to provide infrastructure and services, as well as other facilities that make the zone an attractive destination for the AI industry.

You can learn more about special economic zones, such as the AI Special Zone, by reading the Law of Special Economic Zones and Free Zones in full in English on the link below:

The Sultanate of Oman is now a party to two of the most important international treaties governing cross border dispute resolution: The New York Convention, which deals with arbitration awards, and the Singapore Convention, which deals with settlement agreements resulting from mediation.

While both serve the same broad goal of making it easier to enforce the outcomes of alternative dispute resolution across borders, they differ in scope, mechanism, and history. This post examines what each convention does and how Oman has adopted them.

What Each Convention Does

New York Convention: Formally the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. This convention creates a uniform mechanism for enforcing arbitral awards issued in one contracting state within the territory of another, eliminating the need to relitigate the dispute from scratch.

Singapore Convention: Formally the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation. It does for mediation what the New York Convention did for arbitration, enabling direct enforcement of international mediation settlement agreements across member states.

Given the key difference between arbitration and mediation, the New York Convention is used to enforce the arbitral award decided by the arbitration tribunal, while the Singapore Convention is used to enforce the settlement agreement signed between the parties to a mediation process.

Oman’s Accession: A Timeline

Oman acceded to the New York Convention, which was entered into force in 1959, through Royal Decree 36/98, making it part of Omani law with effect from 10 June 1998.

Nearly three decades later, Oman joined the Singapore Convention, which entered into force in 2020, through Royal Decree 6/2026, issued on 11 January 2026. Oman is considered one of the early adopters of the Singapore Convention.

What This Means for Businesses

For international companies and investors in Oman, the practical significance is straightforward. An arbitral award issued in any of the 170+ New York Convention member states can be enforced in Oman without relitigating the merits.

Now, a settlement agreement resulting from mediation conducted in any Singapore Convention member state enjoys a similarly streamlined pathway. Mediation settlements are no longer “weaker” instruments; they are legally binding and enforceable.

Interaction with Omani Law

Given the maturity of the arbitration framework in Oman, the New York Convention operates directly and clearly within the legal framework of the Law of Arbitration in Civil and Commercial Disputes and the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law. Article 1 of the Arbitration Law expressly preserves the primacy of international agreements, while article 9 grants the Court of Appeal in Muscat jurisdiction over international commercial arbitrations. Article 58 stipulates that enforcement requires that the award does not violate Oman’s public order and that the award is final in its country of origin.

Oman does not currently have a proper legal framework for governing mediation as a form of alternative dispute resolution, nor does it have any legal provisions that govern settlement agreements arising out of mediation proceedings outside the general provisions of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law that are triggered when the parties decide to settle a dispute that has already been presented before the court, not those that have independently been reached by the parties without starting litigation first. The Law of Public Notaries can be used to give settlement agreements the power of enforcement documents, but this requires both parties to notarise the agreement before the Public Notary, which is not usually possible if one of the parties is not in Oman.

It is worth noting that the mediation concept found in the Singapore Convention is not the same as the mediation concept found in the Omani Law of Mediation and Conciliation, which relates to mediation through official government tribunals, and not through an independent mediator.

This means that even though Oman is legally bound to provide a mechanism for recognising settlement agreements resulting from mediation, a domestic legal framework still does not exist for the courts to enforce such agreements.

Conclusion

This blog post highlighted the key differences between the New York Convention and the Singapore Convention and how each operates within the Omani legal framework.

For the Singapore Convention to achieve its objectives, Oman must consider issuing a standalone mediation law as well as specific provisions for the courts to enforce settlement agreements that meet the requirements of the Singapore Convention.

You can read the full text of the Singapore Convention on the link below:

The law gives the National Survey and Geospatial Information Authority, which is a department of the Ministry of Defence, broad oversight over geospatial matters in the country. For example, you need permission from the authority to conduct surveys, to produce any map or atlas, to export geospatial data outside Oman, or to use the maps of Oman commercially.

Failure to comply with this law results in penalties up to 3 years of imprisonment and fines up to 30,000 Rial Omani.

Entities affected by the law have 6 months from its entry into force to bring themselves into compliance. 

You can read the National Geospatial Data and Information Law in full in English on the link below:

Liquidators and Administrative Fees

According to article 46(2) of the Commercial Companies Law, first priority goes to the liquidation process itself before any debts are settled. The company pays the liquidator hired to sell the assets, along with any court fees and the costs of keeping the company’s property safe until it can be sold. If these administrative costs are not covered, the legal process cannot move forward.

Worker Dues

According to article 92 of the Labour Law, wages, rights, and all amounts due to a worker or to beneficiaries on his behalf by virtue of the Labour Law have priority over all other debts owed by the employer. This means that priority shifts to staff and employee salaries, end-of-service gratuity, and any unpaid amounts immediately after the payment of fees associated with the liquidation process itself.

Privileged Creditors

Once workers are paid, priority moves to claims by privileged creditors such as government-owed taxes, secured bank loans, and other claims in accordance with article 185 of the Bankruptcy Law.

General Claims

Article 185 of the Bankruptcy Law further details that once privileged claims are settled, the liquidator addresses all other general third-party claims. This category includes business partners, trade suppliers, and contractors.

The Bottom of the List: Partners and Shareholders

Finally come the business owners. The partners or shareholders of the company are at the very bottom of the list. They only receive a distribution if there is money left over after every other debt, tax, and salary is paid in full in accordance with article 46(3) of the Commercial Companies Law.

Conclusion

This post provides a simplified outline of the order in which creditors are paid when an LLC liquidates. The matter becomes more complicated when there are multiple privileged creditors that have to go through their own prioritisation process.

If you are involved in the process of liquidating a business, we highly recommend that you familiarise yourself with the Commercial Companies Law and the Bankruptcy Law.

Written by:

Nouf Al-Lamki

Nouf is a legal intern at Decree. She has previously interned in the banking sector, the aviation sector, and in private practice. She is interested in corporate. She holds a LLB from the Modern College of Business and Science.

Organise Your Workflow with Pinned Conversations

Managing multiple research threads is now easier than ever. Your conversation list is now divided into Pinned and Recent sections, so your high-priority projects stay front and center.

• Conversations Controls: We’ve added a simple “hold and press” gesture. Just long-press any conversation to pull up a menu of options to Rename, Delete, or Pin/Unpin your chats.
• Search Within Chats: No more endless scrolling. You can now use the search bar within your conversation history to instantly find specific topics or past advice.

Smart Notifications for Deep Research

Because our new agentic search performs deep synthesis of Omani legislation, complex answers can take a moment to generate. You no longer need to wait inside the app. Simply submit your query and switch to other tasks and Lex AI will send a push notification to your phone and allows you to receive notifications on the desktop as soon as your response is ready.

These updates are live for all users on both iOS and Android as well as the web version of Lex AI. Update your app on the App Store or Google Play Store to get started.

This blog post will highlight five key attributes of this agreement:

1. CEPA is a Free Trade Agreement

A CEPA at its core is a free trade agreement, which is an agreement that focuses on eliminating tariffs on the import of goods and services between countries. A CEPA attempts to be more comprehensive by incorporating additional matters such as collaboration in the area of SMEs and other topics between countries.

2. Oman-India CEPA is the biggest treaty that Oman has ever signed

Based on word count and the number of pages of the agreement, This agreement is the biggest and longest agreement that Oman has ever taken part in.

3. The treatment of goods and services between the two countries under the CEPA is asymmetrical

While most bilateral agreements provide equal treatment between the two countries, CEPA adopts a more delicate approach as the treatment of goods differs between the two countries so that, for example, one good would be exempt from tariffs going into country A, but not exempt from tariffs going into country B. This is intended to ensure that countries domestic businesses are not affected by the provisions of the agreement.

4. Oman-India CEPA allows the presence of some employees of service providers to stay in Oman for periods upto four years

One of the unique aspects of the Oman-India CEPA is the treatment of the employees of service providers which will be allowed in specific cases to allow them to enter Oman and stay for a period of up to two years extensible for an additional period of two years. It is worth noting that this applies to a specific category of employees, such as senior managers and those with special technical skills, and not all the employees of the service provider.

5. Oman-India CEPA has not entered into force

Oman-India CEPA was signed in December 2025 and ratified by Oman in February 2026. For the treaty to enter into force, both Oman and India are required to complete their legal formalties and communicate to each other that the treaty is effective from their side. At the time of writing this post, India has not published any updates on completing its internal procedures to commence the implementation of the treaty. However, it is expected for this to take place in the upcoming months.

Conclusion

Oman-India CEPA is one of the most significant treaties that Oman has ever signed, and it is expected to have significant implications on the relationship between the two countries, but also on how business is conducted in Oman in general.

You can read the text of this treaty in full in English on the link below:

Written by:

Nouf Al-Lamki

Nouf is a legal intern at Decree. She has previously interned in the banking sector, the aviation sector, and in private practice. She is interested in corporate. She holds a LLB from the Modern College of Business and Science.