"Criminal Affairs: The higher the position, the greater the responsibility"
- Former Interior Ministry official sentenced to seven years in “border cameras” case
- A public employee holding a leadership position at the border is expected to serve as a “watchful eye”
- Public office must not become a conduit for facilitating what should not be permitted
- It is unacceptable for responsibility to devolve into a burden that its holders shirk
The Criminal Court, presided over by Judge Khaled Rashad and with judges Abdulhadi Al-Hajjari and Abdulaziz Al-Mu’adadi, and clerk Yaqoub Al-Bilam, sentenced a former senior official in the Ministry of Interior to seven years’ imprisonment with hard labor and dismissal from his post, ordered him to repay 1.293 million dinars, and fined him 2.587 million dinars on two charges of association, in a case concerning the maintenance contract for border cameras, the supply and installation of an underground invisible system, and the maintenance of networks and devices.
The court also sentenced an accused foreign national in absentia to seven years’ imprisonment with hard labor and ordered his deportation from the country after serving his sentence. It decided to suspend sentencing for seven other defendants, including a former senior official, while requiring each of them to provide a written pledge of good conduct and behavior for one year, backed by a financial guarantee of 500 dinars.
In its reasoning, the court emphasized that public office must not become a means to facilitate what should not be permitted, nor should responsibility turn into a burden that its holders shirk. It noted that the greater the position, the greater the duty; and the closer the work is to the security of the country and its people, the more sacred it is to avoid negligence.
The court stressed the gravity of the responsibility borne by those in leadership positions, affirming that a public employee holding a leadership role at the country’s borders is not merely exercising administrative authority, but is entrusted with safeguarding both public funds and national security.
It affirmed that such a position requires the incumbent to act as a “watchful eye” over what is under his supervision, and that negligence must not become a means to perpetuate dysfunction or a shield for the negligent.
The court clarified that harm could have been avoided had duties been performed with integrity and oversight powers been properly exercised. It noted that vigilance can prevent errors from escalating and can prevent documents and reports from serving as a curtain to conceal the reality of misappropriation of public funds.
