Consumer Protection and Dispute Committee to Avoid 'Prosecutorial' Burden
The article criticizes the National Consumer Protection Committee for failing to activate its legal mandates and calls for establishing a commercial disputes committee to alleviate the burden on the Public Prosecution and protect consumers' rights from bureaucracy.
Translated by Qiyas from الجريدة — Original source
Law No. 39 of 2014 concerning Consumer Protection stipulates in its second chapter the establishment of the “National Committee for Consumer Protection,” composed of twelve members: ten from government entities and two from civil society. A quick review of its activities in the media revealed ambiguity regarding its effectiveness. Between 2014 and 2023, we found only a few news reports and statements regarding meetings with similar purposes, such as forming committees and distributing tasks.
In 2024, a minister formed a committee to review the law and its executive regulations to identify its shortcomings. However, the law granted the Committee five formidable authorities to protect consumers, the most important of which are: “receiving complaints from consumers and consumer protection associations, examining and investigating them, notifying the competent authorities, and filing and intervening in lawsuits related to consumers’ interests.” Why did the Committee not activate this provision? At the June 2026 meeting of the Consumer Protection Committee of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, the Ministry of Commerce participated through its Commercial Control and Consumer Protection Administration. Does this imply that the Committee does not exist at all? We may be mistaken, but this is a perplexing question directed at the Minister of Commerce.
Initially, the law sparked a dispute with the National Assembly due to the non-activation of its provisions and applications, particularly the delay in licensing consumer protection associations. Some of these associations appeared to be merely formalistic after their establishment, based on their rudimentary websites. Consumer complaints submitted via the “Sahl” platform regarding the Ministry’s procedures revealed that the law had equipped the “Consumer Protection” Administration, responsible for its implementation, with sharp tools to vindicate consumers. However, these tools are not used aggressively. Complainants instead encounter a sterile bureaucratic cycle that drains their time and energy, causing complaints to lose their deterrent effect against commercial establishments over time. Meanwhile, Chapter Four of the law provides consumers with strong guarantees to protect their rights within a short timeframe. Chapter Five imposes strict obligations on the “supplier” (i.e., the merchant), and Chapter Seven prescribes severe penalties, including imprisonment.
Although the Ministry has the right to refer complaints to the Public Prosecution as a legal procedure, using this as a substitute for the direct pressure available to the Consumer Protection Administration constitutes implicit leniency that prolongs disputes. Does the Ministry realize the fear that the term “Public Prosecution” instills in ordinary men and women when they go for interrogation? Transferring a commercial dispute involving a few hundred dinars to a case heard by the Prosecution means delaying resolution for months within the labyrinth of litigation. This often leads consumers to regret filing complaints after facing months of hassle, causing them to waive their future rights.
The practice of the Consumer Protection Administration requesting the establishment against which a complaint is filed to provide a report on the product’s condition is incorrect, as it makes the defendant the judge. The Ministry should instead rely on an independent technical party to assess the defect, with the costs borne by the complained-against party. Furthermore, the complainant’s role should end upon submitting their complaint to the Ministry, which should then represent them before the opposing parties. This is indeed stipulated in the law in Chapter Two, Article 6, Clause 2, regarding the authorities of the Consumer Protection Committee, the text of which was mentioned at the beginning of this article.
The Ministry of Commerce should establish a “Commercial Dispute Resolution Committee” for amounts below a certain threshold, such as less than 10,000 dinars. The Public Prosecution’s prestige and its serious responsibilities should not be burdened with investigating commercial disputes involving mere hundreds of dinars.
In conclusion, we urge the Ministry to more aggressively utilize the legal tools available to it to protect consumers and to establish the proposed committee for disputes to avoid wasting the Prosecution’s time.
