In order to build a passive house you have to limit the final energy use for cooling to 15 kWh/m² per year and your primary energy use for HVAC and lighting has to be less than 90 kWh/m² per year minus the deduction for compactness, so let's say around 70 kWh/m².
I guess getting to 15 kWh/m² final energy use for cooling (i.e. the heat extracted from spaces including all the insulation losses) in a climate like Saudi Arabia is almost impossible. In a classic building technique it would mean very thick insulation and small windows in order to limit solar heat loads through fenestrations.
The other criterion however, the primary energy use, would not be that difficult to meet because it represents the balance between the primary energy used and generated on-site by renewables (e.g. PV panels). So if your vapour compression cooling system uses 100 kWh/m² per year and your PV panels produce 40 kWh/m² per year (per m² of building net surface, not per surface of panels) you get to 60 kWh/m² in total which is quite good. If your PV panels create 100 kWh/m² then your balance is 0 and you have a net zero energy building.
So in conclusion, it does not make really sense to apply the 15 kWh/m² rule in Saudi Arabia. This rule (like the whole passive house concept) was made up in Germany and is a completely political choice which does not have any meaning (it could also be 10 or 25 kWh/m²). What is more important is the net primary energy use and this one you can keep in the passive limits. In fact, to build a building that has a low net primary energy balance Saudi Arabia is a good place because you have plenty of sun and you can generate a lot of green electricity on site with PV panels, something that is not possible in cold climates where the solar energy is not so abundant.