------------- -------------- ------------------- -------------------

When reverence fades,say bye bye to the State

This post has been read 15186 times!

IF court verdicts were based on gossip, the world would be ruined, and the accused would be found guilty even if conclusive evidence proved his innocence. Therefore, the verdict philosophy of the judiciary was based on conclusive evidence to prove guilt, and not evidence based on assumptions, which is always circumstantial.

That is why it is the characteristic of the judiciary to interpret suspicion in favor of the accused based on the merits that he is innocent until his guilt is proven by the substantial and conclusive evidence that reassures the judge that there is no doubt beyond the ruling in question.

The judge does not rule except with the documents, evidence and witnesses he has. Even in this matter, his judgment is preliminary, not conclusive.

There are three degrees of litigation – first instance, appeal and cassation. In these stages, the accused has fulfilled all his rights if the highest degrees of litigation ruled innocence. All the rulings issued in the lower degrees fall as if nothing had happened. However, if convicted, the ruling shall be executed.

Now, the question is – Is there anyone who doubts a felony from the weight of the financial embezzlement in the army fund or others so that the ruling is not as it should be?

In other words, the documents with the judge are directed to the interests of the defendants, especially if there is a document from the highest references in the country, signed by the brother of one of the convicts; hence, the judge does not have to look further, but rather he must rule with the evidence and documents in hand.

It is shameful that some people smear the judiciary, especially those who are supposed to legislate, who must be fully aware of the legal principles, and not become a bad role model for the public who rally behind excitement and enthusiasm.

It is necessary that there are judicial paths to be followed by those affected, if they believe in the impartiality of the judiciary, given that there are those who attack this authority if the ruling comes against them, and cheer for it if it is ruled in their favor.

Such kind of people are not to be relied upon because they fall into the description mentioned in the Quran – “And among men there is such a one who serves God upon the very edge. If good befalls him, he is at rest in it, but if a trial befalls him, he turns completely over, and he loses this world and the world to come; that is indeed the manifest loss.”

In all countries of the world, gangs and mafias practice their criminal acts without leaving evidence, or working to adapt legal loopholes to their advantage. Therefore, they choose the most skilled lawyers who twist evidence and turn them into clues that contain a lot of doubt, thus guaranteeing the innocence of the accused who come out of it “like hair from dough”. They even demand the victim to compensate the accused.

In the case of the Army Fund, which has been continuing for more than three years, many events took place that changed the direction of the judicial path. Even those concerned have died, so this was the outcome in which the judiciary has no involvement.

Nonetheless, when the state becomes weak, reverence fades, and the guilty is confident to twist the course of events to his advantage. Thus, the statement of the Arab sociologist Abdul-Rahman bin Khaldun who said, “Injustice brings about the ruin of civilization,” is definitely true.

Some neighboring countries went through this turbulent situation until they found someone to restore the state’s reverence through a series of bold and painful decisions. However, such decisions were met with great popular satisfaction, which made the citizens feel reassured about their present and future generations. This is what Kuwait needs today through a firm and capable executive authority.

By Ahmed Al-Jarallah

Editor-in-Chief, the Arab Times