RSS
 Add News     Print  
Article List
‘Anti-Amir’ blogger jailed for 4 yrs More deliberation on ex-MPs case

KUWAIT CITY, Jan 20: The Criminal Court sentenced a ‘Twitter’ user to four-year imprisonment with hard labor for possessing drugs. According to the case files, the suspect was already involved in a State Security case for offending HH the Amir on ‘Twitter’ social networking website, for which the Court of First Instance had sentenced him to fiveyear imprisonment with hard labor, which was upheld by the Court of Appeals. The Public Prosecution accused the suspect of posting offensive and improper remarks about the powers of HH the Amir on Twitter website. He was also accused of misusing his mobile phone.

Case referred: The Cassation Court on Monday referred the State Security case filed against former MPs Falah Al-Sawagh, Bader Al-Dahoom and Khalid Tahoos for defaming the Amiri entity to another division to deliberate on it again. It has been reported that the Court of Appeals revoked the ruling of the Court of First Instance, which sentenced the three accused to three years in jail with hard labor and immediate execution. The higher court then acquitted the three former lawmakers of defaming the Amiri entity when they participated in a seminar organized by former MP Salem Al-Namlan in Jaber Al-Ali.

Bedoun protest: The Criminal Court adjourned until Feb 24 the hearing on the Bedoun rally case against 43 people. Case files indicate some Bedouns held sit-ins in Taima and Sulaibiya during the International Day of Non- Violence during which the accused where arrested.

Barrak sued: The Misdemeanor Court adjourned until Feb 3 the lawsuit one National Assembly election candidate from Fourth Constituency filed against ex-MP Musallam Al- Barrak for causing his dismal performance in the elections. Defendant lawyers Mohammad Al- Jassem and Jasser Al-Jad’a said their client had only expressed political opinion, while Al-Barrak claimed he did not know the plaintiff let alone knowing about his candidature to malign him. The lawyers are of the view that investigation officers should not have filed charges in the first place for legal proceedings in court, because the statement was clearly directed to the intended person.

Read By: 2002
Comments: 0
Rated:

Comments
You must login to add comments ...
About Us   |   RSS   |   Contact Us   |   Feedback   |   Advertise With Us