LAWMAKERS who have been indicating plan to impede activities of the new government may likely not realize that such action is tantamount to political suicide for them, because they are rushing into confrontation without any excuse against the Cabinet formation which has come to perform rather than turning it into a punching bag with which the lawmakers can practice boxing for electoral domicile. His Highness the Prime Minister was not just cautious with the selection of ministers as he was keen on avoiding being a lame Cabinet that cannot move straight.
The political leadership bestowed trust on the team to ensure performance; hence, it is not ready to sacrifice any of them, at least for now. Therefore, Ghadeer Asiri or any other minister was chosen to remain with the government, not to be converted into a credit point for some lawmakers who do not have any proposal in their representation.
The crucial factor here is not in the names – whether or not they are acceptable to any political bloc, it is about performance. Constitutionally, no minister can be held accountable for a yet to be taken action.
Holding accountable for political antecedent involves many false accusations and it is even hinting the intention to impede government activities and prevent cooperation between the two authorities.
In view of this, any defective step taken by the lawmakers before discussing government work while granting time for action and achievement, which could be followed by verdict on the results, means the confrontation will not serve the interest of the National Assembly.
It is only then that the Assembly Speaker has the right to raise the non-cooperation letter against the Cabinet. This decision will take the country to elections, in which the period of consideration before fixing the date may be long. Experience in the past years convinced everybody that the lawmakers are engaging in electoral battles at the expense of national interest, human rights and public fund; while they do not weigh any other issue.
Lawmakers, who hoisted the flag of early challenge by indicating intention to prevent a minister from taking the constitutional oath in the Assembly before even seeing his performance, should mull over this fact. Is this the right democratic practice? Is it not possible to hold certain lawmakers responsible for their statements and positions in support of groups and organizations categorized as terrorists in Kuwait and GCC countries, including the United Nations? Why do they approve for themselves what they disapprove for others? All of us in Kuwait know well that the last year of the parliamentary term usually turns into a battlefield between the executive and legislative authorities as MPs try hard to increase their electoral deposits.
This attitude is legal under the umbrella of democracy on one condition – do not disturb the work of constitutional institutions, especially the legislative and executive authorities. These two authorities must devote their efforts to completion of draft laws which accumulated during this legislative term, particularly since the performance of the legislative authority in previous terms was not satisfactory.
In previous terms, the MPs spent time fl ooding ministers with parliamentary questions. They grilled most ministers, including the prime minister. The Assembly is being asked to just cooperate at this stage. It is asked to hold workshops with the government in order to complete projects included in the latter’s agenda. MPs are asked to bear their responsibility in handling issues, but such task will not be accomplished without full cooperation. The adventures that some MPs are talking about reflect nothing but political immaturity which will certainly result in very high cost. No one in Kuwait seeks to pay for such a high price, just those who closed their eyes to what is going on around us. They might push for transporting regional fires to Kuwait.
By Ahmed Al-Jarallah Editor-in-Chief, the Arab Times