Local joy and revelry... I wish it returned every day
“Long live the Farhoud! I wish every day were like it.” This is a well-known popular chant from Iraq’s historical memory. In Iraqi dialect, the word “Farhoud” refers to collective looting and pillaging that occurs when the rule of law collapses, chaos prevails, and violations against property, security, and stability become the norm. The Farhoud incident took place in Baghdad in 1941. It was a wave of violence and looting targeting Iraqi Jews, but it also triggered broader security breaches that left homes and shops vulnerable to plunder and destruction. Some individuals exploited the situation for personal gain, stealing and encroaching upon state and private assets.
The slogan later became a label for describing a state of mind that welcomes the return of lawlessness and disorder, as it offers opportunities for corruption, looting, and appropriation without oversight or punishment.
Since the dawn of liberation in 1991, pens have not dried and voices have not ceased warning about a climate of corruption that enveloped Kuwait at the time, creating a fertile environment for those who misappropriated the country’s resources. The extent of the plunder was such that a bundle of lettuce worth one fils was sold to the state for one hundred dinars. By that standard, most subsequent tenders and contracts followed suit, and theft became a matter of pride, with people detailing their illicit gains in social gatherings. The looting, pillaging, and corruption were collective; the law was constrained; and corrupt individuals enjoyed prominent, even leading, social status.
Recently, Kuwait has seen efforts to contain corruption and hold public money thieves accountable. The latest developments include transferring suspects in the agricultural holdings case to the criminal courts, pursuing illicit enrichment, and referring senior officials for investigation based on allegations, among many other steps. These actions are restoring citizens’ confidence in the state’s seriousness in combating corruption.
However, holding corrupt individuals accountable alone addresses only the symptom, not the approach that has entrenched itself in society over decades. There is no doubt that transferring corruption files to the Public Prosecution, issuing verdicts, and punishing those involved are necessary and important steps. Yet corruption does not typically begin merely with violating the law, embezzling public funds, or infringing upon citizens’ rights. It starts when a circle of influential figures, immune to accountability, dominates. When positions and roles are derived from loyalty and distinction based on tribal, sectarian, or familial ties rather than competence and merit, and when the fight against corruption is treated merely as a series of isolated crimes—where suspects are sent to court and verdicts are issued—then the anti-corruption effort remains only episodic, not fundamental.
Despite the importance of such measures, they do not constitute a decisive and root-level solution to corruption unless they also address the deep-seated environment that enabled corrupt actors to operate and commit crimes against the nation and its citizens. A decisive fight against corruption does not begin in courtrooms or with verdicts against corrupt individuals alone. It starts with the state’s role in building a political, economic, and administrative system that hinders corrupt activities, exposes them, and makes the cost of corruption prohibitively high for those involved.
The role of the prosecution or the courts is limited to issuing or confirming punishments. The court alone cannot build an environment immune to corruption, as it deals with harm after it has occurred. In contrast, fortifying state institutions and closing the loopholes through which corrupt actors operate is a task for the state, which must preempt harm by suppressing, through its laws and policies, the environment that gave rise to corruption.
The Farhoud incident, mentioned earlier, serves as a prime example. Any chaos in any society does not leave a vacuum; rather, it is quickly filled by corrupt individuals and public money thieves, who begin treating public funds and the rights of the state and citizens as legitimate spoils. This happened in recent history, during the chaos of reconstruction following the invasion.
The goal, therefore, is to improve our performance today so that the confrontation with corruption becomes decisive.
Suad Fahd Al-Muajjal
