Political sphere in Kuwait has been witnessing hectic developments since the start of June, with snap general elections held on 6 June, followed two weeks later with the announcement of a new 15-member cabinet headed by His Highness the Prime Minister Sheikh Ahmad Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah. A day later, on 20 June, the premier, the cabinet and the 50 elected parliament members took their constitutional oath during the first ordinary session of the 17th legislative term of the National Assembly.
Inaugurating the initial session of the legislative term, His Highness the Deputy Amir and Crown Prince Sheikh Meshal Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah urged legislators to focus on reforms for the “sake of Kuwait, with the goal of achieving the aspirations of the people for a prosperous future”. He further stressed that there was “no room to waste time on conflicts, settling scores, triggering crises, and irresponsible practices”.
His Highness the Crown Prince called on MPs to cooperate with the government in order to address all sources of tension and thereby promote democratic practices. He urged them to focus on boosting the supervisory and legislative role of the National Assembly to achieve the aspirations of citizens, and to give the government enough time to achieve its work plans.
His Highness the Crown Prince’s’ sagacious advice has apparently been imbibed by parliament. Since the start of the current session, a rare camaraderie appears to be in place between the executive and legislative wings of parliament, with none of the usual ruckus surrounding parliamentary proceedings, or threats of imminent grillings, at least not so far.
Addressing legislators on the occasion, His Highness the Prime Minister Sheikh Ahmad Nawaf-Ahmad Al-Sabah said, “We are living in a new era that needs a new vision of national work based on the foundations of reform, to achieve the aspirations of the people.” He added that the “government looks forward to a fruitful relationship with the new parliament”.
Outlining the government’s program of work for the legislative term to 2027, the premier said the reform-oriented plan was both realistic and feasible. He noted that the work plan includes the priorities to be implemented over the coming period and as per a specific timetable, so as to meet the aspirations of citizens and to ensure the sustainable growth of the country.
The prevailing collaborative environment could help the government win parliamentary approval for several long-pending policies and reforms to revitalize the economy, as well as lend support for the action plan outlined by the premier.
However, gaining parliamentary cooperation and support for implementing various economic, administrative, and social reforms and policies, should not come at the expense of trust in the government, and in its commitment to good governance.
Since taking over as premier in July 2022, Sheikh Ahmad Al-Nawaf Al-Sabah has made good governance a key plank of his administration, and this has stood him in good stead with the people, and politicians on both sides of parliament. The importance of maintaining good governance cannot be overstressed, as it forms the linchpin of any government committed to sustainable and prosperous development of the country, and to the welfare of its people.
Without good governance all implementations of plans, policies, and reforms eventually become ineffective, and over time erodes confidence in the government and credence in its various apparatuses and entities. Although there is no universally accepted definition of good governance, it is often described as the process whereby public institutions conduct affairs, manage resources and guarantee the realization of human rights, in a manner that is free of abuse, discrimination and corruption, with due regard for the rule of law.
Good governance involves, among others, transparency, responsibility, accountability, participation, and responsiveness to the needs of the people, which is probably why good governance is such a rare phenomena in public administrations. While governments are largely responsible for implementing good governance policies, they are not the only ones who hold sway in this process. External actors and structures also influence, either overtly or covertly, the model of governance.
In democracies, these external influences include members of the legislative assembly, judiciary, academics, civil society , special-interest groups, and lobbyists for internal and external powers, as well as formal and informal structures, all of whom, or which, could have a voice and a role in how government decisions are made and in how they are implemented.
In Kuwait, the government is represented by the political leadership and the cabinet,who are responsible for the process of formulating and implementing decisions. Other actors and structures influencing the outcome of these processes include the National Assembly, the Courts, and members of civil society, which encompasses social organizations, business interests, religious leaders, and the media, as well as foreign influences.
Catering to the confluence and divergence of interests and pressures by this varied group of influencers means that the government has a hard time making and implementing decisions that are in the best interests of all people, all the time. Aware of the saying that ‘attempting to please everyone will result in pleasing no one’, the government has on occasion responded to these pulls and pressures, by taking decisions that involve a trade-off. These decisions have invariably left one or more sections of society dissatisfied with the outcome.
Responsiveness to the needs and aspirations of people is crucial to strengthening good governance. Listening to the demands of the public, and striving to reach a broad consensus on contentious issues through discussions and mediations with different interest groups, is a hallmark of good governance. However, this necessitates the authorities to have a deep understanding of the historical, cultural and social contexts of the society, and awareness of the aspirations of people.
While finding complete consensus on controversial issues would be an ideal form of practicing good governance, it is not a practical or effective way of reaching and implementing decisions. In today’s world, good governance necessitates being consensus-oriented, but not consensus-constrained. But, even if gaining buy-in from all stakeholders on controversial issues is not feasible, it is important to ensure that policies, reforms and decisions taken are not wilfully or unwittingly discriminatory towards specific sections of society.
Unfortunately, this is what occurred last week in parliament. As part of its accommodative stance to ensure cooperation and collaboration from legislators, the government last week rushed through a new bill on election reforms and the setting up of an election commission. The bill was promptly and overwhelmingly endorsed by the National Assembly last Thursday.
One would have expected that a bill of such purport, which could have far-reaching consequences for the country and its political and social life, would be duly deliberated by experts, academia and in the public domain before being presented to parliament, let alone being voted upon at such notice. Admittedly, earlier in the week, the government had announced that it would submit a bill on parliamentary elections and on setting up the election commission, following an agreement reached by the government-parliamentary coordination committee.
The bill stipulates that the election commission would function under jurisdictions of the minister of justice and oversee the organization of the electoral process and monitor the polls. It would also be tasked with examining legality of nominations for the parliamentary elections, setting rules for electoral campaigns, regulating election expenses and funding resources and time to be dedicated fairly for the candidates in the audio-visual media.
The supreme commission will also be mandated to receive complaints from voters, nominees and involved organizations and report to the public prosecution regarding any suspected crime during the electoral process.It will also be tasked to declare the election results and preparing an assessment of the general elections, with a copy of this report submitted to the minister of justice and to the head of the supreme judicial council.
Unsurprisingly, once provisions in the bill on parliamentary elections and the setting up of an election commission was elucidated in public, it came in for criticism from many quarters, including by several women’s associations and civil society organizations. In a joint statement last week, women’s groups voiced their opposition and called for the immediate elimination of Article 16 of the bill that requires women to comply with rules and provisions of Islamic law in order to exercise their voting and candidacy rights.
The statement pointed out that Article 16 of the proposed law not only contradicts Article 35 of the Constitution that guarantees absolute freedom of belief and the right to practice religious rituals according to customs, but also the fundamental and civil rights of women. Moreover, it was gender discriminatory as it did not ask for such compliance from men candidates. The statement also noted that the Constitutional Court in its ruling in 2009 had upheld the constitution’s rejection of such restrictive and conflicting ideas.
In further developments, lawmakers also agreed on amending some provisions of Law No. 14 of 1973 that established the constitutional court. The amendments, which received near unanimous support from legislators, stipulates that in “all cases that come before it, the constitutional court may not consider the decrees on dissolving the National Assembly, and the call for elections after the result is declared”.
The modifications also immunize the National Assembly after the voting process, and organizes the time and rules for appeals on the two decrees — dissolving the parliament and the calling for election separately. For his part, the Minister of Justice and Minister of State for Housing Affairs Faleh Al-Rguba, said the government supports the amendments, and that the modifications could help end the appeals submitted to the constitutional court over the last year.
Amendments to parliamentary elections, the setting up of an election commission, and the curbing of powers of the constitutional court could have far-reaching consequences for the country over the coming period. These are also likely to be contentious topics that reverberate in social discussions and in academic and political deliberations in the days and weeks ahead.
One can only hope that the government, which has built its reputation on good governance in public life, will take heed of these public discourses. And that the authorities will ensure the plans, policies and reforms it seeks to implement through parliamentary consensus, do not come at the expense of the aspirations of large sections of the public, and more importantly, it does not discriminate against specific groups in society.