Search and arrest warrants
This news has been read 15883 times!
When the former Minister of Commerce Khaled Al-Roudhan considered presenting the new bankruptcy bill to the National Assembly, I was one of the first supporters and I wrote more than one article in support of his position, and I still do, in general, and stick to my previous opinion.
The law not only protects small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), but also provides a great societal service, develops the financial and legal system of the state, and brings it in line with the laws of developed countries.
The law came at the right time, amid expectations of the failure and loss of a large part of small and medium enterprises as a result of the effects of Covid-19 pandemic and the growing need for a modern law that protects the owners of these companies from seizure, summons, and subsequent imprisonment, instead of helping them, rescue themselves from distress and return to their previous activity, through giving the insolvent/bankrupt more protection to practice his business again, and this is universally called Protection from Creditors or Chapter 11 laws.
In short, the law achieved the following benefits — creation of a bankruptcy court; filling the gaps in the old law, especially in fraud, asset smuggling and concealment; special treatments for SMEs; heavy penalties of up to 5 years imprisonment and relatively large fines to the fraudsters; a bonafide bankrupt may run for election and be employed; speed up the completion of restructuring operations, shortening them, and creating a special system for them; limiting the task of supervising bankruptcy to auditors registered with the Capital Markets Authority; the possibility of obtaining new financing or a loan for the bankrupt during the settlement procedures period and allowing the defaulter to open a new project, provided that it does not harm the creditors.
Almost ten months after the law was issued, and days before its enforcement, the gates of hell opened for it from several sides, the first of which was the distinguished lawyer Imad Al-Saif, who warned in an early tweet against the complete abolition of the arrest and summons system, and demanded its amendment, warning that regressions of its application in its current form will be harsh, knowing that experienced lawyers, accounting bodies, auditors and legal academics praised the new law at the time, without paying attention to what lawyer Al-Saif noticed, somewhat early.
In this regard, the honorable Counselor, Ahmad Al-Ajeel, called on the government to expedite the preparation of a bill to amend the bankruptcy law, canceling its abolition of the articles of search and arrest warrants in the pleadings law, or specifying their cases to be submitted to the National Assembly for approval in the sense of urgency in the next session.
Through several contacts, and from articles, statements and messages on social media, it became clear to me that there is almost agreement on lawyer Al-Saif’s position on the law, and with the opinion of Counselor Al-Ajeel, President of the Supreme Judicial Council, in terms of continuing warrants of arrest and bring the matter back to what it was in the old law, especially for cases in which judgments have already been issued or will be issued in the future, in the interest of widows, divorced women, orphans, government agencies, and many simple people who have been subjected to fraud and defraud, and their rights have been lost and in other cases where one of the parties has nothing to do with trade.
Note: For the owner of the principle and creed, I have never argued with you, but have always sought to expose you. You are not equal to me, and within you, you know that.
e-mail: [email protected]
By Ahmad alsarraf
This news has been read 15883 times!
