Winds and Pegs: Is the Fault in the Constitution or in the People?

Former MP Abdul Latif Al-Omairi posted a tweet marking the issuance of a London court ruling concerning major corruption at the Social Security Organization. Al-Omairi noted that this corruption was the focal point of the interpellation submitted by Al-Anqari, Al-Barak, and Al-Tahous in a previous parliament, which led to the temporary suspension of the director, who was later reinstated after the dissolution of the council.

Al-Omairi was right to highlight one of the council’s achievements, but there are others as well. These include the interpellation that returned the endowment’s land to the General Secretariat of the Endowment, and the law on the trial of ministers, which was approved despite initial government opposition. There is also the law on judicial independence, which was unfortunately amended recently, and the law on the protection of public funds, which played a major role in safeguarding public money and assets. Additionally, Law No. 31 of 2004, which legalized the confiscation of assets from fugitives convicted in public fund cases if they do not return to the country, as well as laws abolishing fees for citizens, maternity leave, Islamic banking, restricting Kuwaiti citizenship to Muslims, and prohibiting the exploitation of women in professions and services reserved for men, among other laws, all played a significant role in reform, combating corruption, and ensuring a decent standard of living for citizens.

This, of course, does not mean that previous parliaments were without errors, particularly the last one. Regrettably, mistakes were made, and some constitutional provisions were violated in interpellations and proposals that harmed proper parliamentary work. Provisions of the regulations were also breached, turning the parliamentary podium into a platform for defamation and insult, contrary to the clear text of the Constitution and regulations. However, the problem lies with those who focus on errors, disseminate them, and ignore achievements in order to discredit parliamentary work as a whole.

Here, it is essential to emphasize two points. First, mistakes occur in all parliaments worldwide, not just in Kuwait. A glaring example today is the American people’s uprising against the Republican majority in both houses of Congress, leading to the replacement of that majority with a Democratic one, and the U.S. Vice President’s acknowledgment of errors there.

Second, some previous governments in Kuwait are also responsible for these errors. The Constitution vested most power in the hands of the government, considering it dominant over state interests. Therefore, the government should have been stronger in confronting imbalances and mistakes, such as the government’s stance on an unconstitutional interpellation in the 1999 parliament. The government refused to include the interpellation on the agenda, but enlightened members struck it from the schedule. This should have been the government’s consistent approach whenever legislation or statements contradicted the Constitution, regulations, or the country’s interests.

Therefore, I believe the flaw lies not in the Constitution itself, but in the individuals who assumed responsibility, whether in parliament or the government. There have been previous parliaments and governments that performed well and benefited Kuwait and its people under the same Constitution.

Proper implementation of the Constitution requires forming a trustworthy and strong government that is committed to the separation of powers, does not allow the legislative branch to tyrannize the executive, takes the initiative in enacting sound legislation, and ensures that financial spending decisions stem from the budget law and not outside it. A minor amendment to the regulations law would be acceptable, provided it ensures constructive, scientific dialogue between the two branches, without undermining parliamentary oversight.