Its Minister of Affairs... and the (.....) Association
A non-Kuwaiti family residing in one of Kuwait’s districts had, over their 40 years in the country, grown accustomed to requesting gas cylinder deliveries to their address without ever being asked whether the home belonged to a Kuwaiti citizen. This woman was suddenly met with a response she had never heard throughout her life in Kuwait: delivery is only for Kuwaiti homes. She replied, “Yes, we are non-Kuwaitis.” The response she received was: “Let one of you go get the gas cylinder yourself.”
I paused at this statement... more so than at the issue of the gas cylinder itself. For me, the issue is not about a gas cylinder, but rather a clear and direct question: By what right? Is there a new official decision prohibiting the delivery of gas cylinders to non-Kuwaitis? Is there a circular from the Ministry of Social Affairs or the Cooperative Societies Union to this effect? Or is it a personal interpretation by the cooperative society, one of its members, or its officials? Has the nationality of the service seeker become a condition for receiving a service provided by a cooperative society within a district to all who reside there, Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti alike, and who enter its markets and make purchases?
Since I do not like to base a position on a one-sided account, I personally contacted two other cooperative societies, different from the one I am discussing here... and inquired whether there was a decision from the Cooperative Societies Union or any official authority restricting gas delivery services to Kuwaitis or society members only. The response I received was: “We do not have such a matter.”
I did not take this step personally unless I had first contacted the authority responsible for gas distribution in the relevant society to verify what I had heard from the non-Kuwaiti woman. I requested a gas delivery for myself. The person informed me, after learning that I am Kuwaiti, that priority for delivery is given to members only... He did not say it was for Kuwaitis only, as he had told the non-Kuwaiti woman.
I was surprised by this response and immediately asked him, with considerable astonishment, about the source of this decision: Is it specific to the society’s board of directors? He first stated that it was a board decision. When I asked for the name of the board chairman to inquire with him, he replied that it was a decision from the Cooperative Societies Union. He then asked for my membership number in the society to deliver the gas cylinder, to ensure that I was a member.
Your Excellency, the Honorable Minister of Social Affairs, if there is no official decision imposing this ban and this new policy from any authority, who decided it in this society? Who gave the employee, or the official to whom instructions were issued (if they were indeed instructions, or if it was a personal decision... regardless of who it was), the authority to categorize people in such a service based on nationality (as stated in the response to the non-Kuwaiti woman)?
We fully understand that cooperative societies have a special nature, and that members have rights and privileges regulated by laws and regulations. No one is calling for the cancellation of Kuwaiti members’ rights or equating them with what is not a right for others. However, there is a significant difference between members’ rights and the daily services provided by the society to the residents and visitors of the area, as we have been accustomed to since the inception of cooperative societies. A non-Kuwaiti living in the area is not asked about his nationality at the society’s door before making a purchase. He enters the market, buys his needs, pays like everyone else, and the society benefits from his purchases.
Allow me, Your Excellency the Minister, to ask: What is the truth behind what happened in this society? Are there indeed official instructions restricting gas cylinder delivery services to Kuwaitis only, or to members first and then others? If such instructions exist, people have the right to know the decision, its number, its reasons, and its scope of application. If they do not exist, I believe this matter warrants a clear investigation—not merely to find a low-level employee to bear the responsibility (who might deny the entire matter) and then close the file. Rather, we must identify who directed him to respond with these instructions and hold him accountable, if this was indeed a personal act.
The danger in this issue lies in allowing every administration, official, or employee to add conditions not established by the state, and to create classifications among people that the law does not require. Kuwait is a country where citizens and residents have lived side by side for decades. Yes, citizens have rights established by the state that others do not share, and this is a understood and settled matter. But turning every daily service into a gateway for discriminating among people (through personal interpretation) is something entirely different. I do not believe Kuwait needs individual interpretations that create unnecessary sensitivities, or present an image suggesting a trend toward separating Kuwaitis from non-Kuwaitis even in the simplest details of life.
Most importantly, cooperative societies and others are not the property of an employee who decides according to his whim, nor of an official who imposes conditions of his own devising. They are institutions that operate according to laws and regulations under state supervision—not according to the mood of any official or employee.
Iqbal Al-Ahmad
