IF those who forged the entire political chaos experienced in the past few years truly intended to reform and mend the practices of the State institutions, why are they flocking to the same institutions now to seek justice — as they claimed the institution did some of them injustices?
What about the person who protested in front of the Justice Palace to demand judicial reforms and decided later to resort to the judiciary, knowing the judiciary has no jurisdiction on the issue? Is he trying to embarrass the judiciary or he wants to continue fishing in muddy water?
There’s no doubt that details of the decision pertaining to the withdrawal of citizenship from some individuals who participated in inciting chaos have nothing to do with what they stand for or what they consider as freedom of opinion and speech. Instead, the withdrawal of citizenship was solely based on irregularities detected in the files they presented for citizenship.
It is a routine for every nation to audit issues of this nature from time to time in order to take appropriate decisions in that regard. This is what the so-called opposition was supposed to understand when they adopted the issue of “citizenship withdrawal” as their bargaining chip to create a sense of injustice on the case, while in reality, they knew the issue does not hold any water.
For someone with a justifiable case, it is obvious when it comes to separating a pure sovereign affair and an issue concerning freedom of opinion or expression — as it’s practically the same as trying to hide from the sun with a finger by standing for the state of institution, and at the same time attempt to cripple it. These people forget that powers of the state institutions are separated, and each authority does not interfere with the other; instead, they complete one another.
Throughout the years, these people have operated upon the notion to dispute the judicial authority as long as it’s against their wrong doings, and once they have overcome it (judiciary), they would have gotten hold of the entire State, or else, they will continue frustrating it —regardless of the law. Indeed, this has been the goal of the wicked group against Kuwait all along.
It’s unfortunate that the group did not even consider the countless advices they received to take the right path and practice constructive politics; rather, they opted for chaos and disorder, and offended people’s integrity and honor, and defied the Amiri entity and its establishment far from what they described as ‘’the authority’s stubbornness”.
The group lacked a proper constructive program to follow through its demands, which were intertwined by its members’ personal interests. It assumed that resorting to higher authorities to settle issues was a sign of weakness, not knowing it’s a sign of the power of conviction that Kuwait is a country of institutions where authorities never give up despite the height of assault by ‘chaos-makers’.
For this reason, there is no other way for those whose citizenships were withdrawn, except for settling for what the law decides on. It is wise for them to disengage from the games that target the integrity of the judiciary to avoid complicating issues.
The law is the law and issues of sovereignty cannot be interfered with, if not, we would see chaos overwhelming the entire country by each person demanding or rather taking his or her rights by force and not by law, and we would see this group or that group protesting in every corner of the country daily in their attempt to achieve personal interests.
Perhaps, the group should come forward to apologize for their wickedness to the people of Kuwait, and try to abide by the law in the sense of expatiation. It may help reduce their burden.
Concerning the sovereignty of citizenship issue, the way forward for those affected is to file their grievances with the concerned authority, and convince the authority on their position or apologize for the mistakes they have committed. Maybe, the authority might lean on their side.
Resorting to authorities that have no jurisdiction on citizenship affairs is not the proper way to address the issue at hand. They should respect the separation of powers and not try to tarnish and mud it, because many will emerge to dishonor the authorities and misbehave.
Editor-in-Chief, the Arab Times