Eliminator to the teeth

As I expected, a faltering start from the Parliament of Opposition, Nationalists and Reformists who are satisfied by whatever can be said of the Arabic language from its benefits. Before I proceed on our topic, let me tell you a simple story. A few days before the elections, I met with a virtuous woman who is an old banker and represents a global bank. Because of her frequent visits to Kuwait and her dealings with Kuwaitis, she became acquainted with us in an effective way and had close to accurate deductions regarding our economy and politics as well. Since this meeting is a few days before the elections, it is normal for the political situation to dominate the conversation, and our colleague summarized the current situation in a succinct manner, saying: "Kuwait may be the only country that manages its affairs in diwaniyas and chalets more than in official workplaces." Frankly, I did not focus on those words until I read in the newspapers about one of the parliament representatives' invitations to his colleagues in his diwaniya to consult on the distribution of committees and positions. Certainly, he invited his friends and those who wanted to exclude the female element from the invitation to attend, in addition to some representatives with whom he differed doctrinally or politically. Moreover, he declares, "We are not exclusionary." So how is the exclusion? And what would that be if not an exclusion? I would like to pose a question to this convenor: Would we have seen you in the National Assembly without the women’s vote? Dear MP, the matter of not inviting sisters Janan and Alia is nothing but a message to the women of Kuwait to see how they view them and their civil and political rights. In the same context, there is another matter that I cannot understand. Why don't your meetings and consultations take place under the dome of Parliament? What is the difference between what you are doing and what you call "consultations," which is considered a criminal act since the by-elections held by one of the tribes under the name of consultation, some of whom were arrested and imprisoned? The principle is the same here, as the distribution of positions outside Abdullah Al-Salem's dome is not much different from the by-elections that take place in the divans and outside the polls. This and that has one result, which is the use of clan, party, and family influence and power to gain access to the Parliament or its positions and committees rather than what it is supposed to be and exclude those who do not owe allegiance to them. This is also what applies to Islamic movements when they nominate their representatives, and what it has to do with the exclusion of those whose leaders do not consider them worthy of nomination, so the masses of their affiliates are turned to elect this or that. As it is known, the parties are not licensed in Kuwait, but what cannot be denied is that the parties are established in Kuwait in a way or another and under the names of associations, conglomerates, or others. The party content is in control and exercises its authority, and this is, in fact, in contravention of the spirit of the law. As I said, "either permit or prohibit everyone," but detailing the legislation of a law directed only to a specific group of society is unfair. Another question I want to address to some of the elected representatives and representatives of some of those charitable associations of a political nature: were your election campaigns from your own money? Or did you obtain support from others, even partially? Is this support from some associations that back up some of the candidates from the surplus funds of charitable donations? Is that permissible in sharia or legally? I think that the time has come to reconsider the election law, for everyone and every candidate should disclose the source of the money donated to him to contribute to his electoral campaign, and this is for the sake of transparency and justice. A legal mechanism must be put in place for regulating donations, their value, and transparency. The Ministry of Affairs must set a separation limit for what is charitable or political work. Before I conclude, I say to our banker colleague: What you said is true, and unfortunately, we may be the only country where many of its decisions are taken in divans and chalets.

Stay Safe.