10-Year Sentence at Risk? Kuwait Court Rejects War Excuse in Major Fraud Case

KUWAIT CITY, Jul 31: Kuwait’s Criminal Court has rejected a defendant’s claim that the regional war and security situation prevented him from returning to the country to attend his appeal hearings, ruling that his appeal was null and void after he repeatedly failed to appear.

The court was considering the case of a defendant who had fled Kuwait after being convicted in absentia in a real estate fraud and money laundering case.

The defendant’s lawyer had argued during the appeal proceedings that the regional circumstances and ongoing conflict had prevented his client from attending court. However, the court rejected the justification, noting that the appeal hearings had started before the outbreak of the regional events.

The court also pointed out that it had previously taken measures specifically to facilitate the defendant’s return to Kuwait.

Court had lifted restrictions to allow his return

According to the court’s reasoning, the defendant’s lawyer had requested that the execution of the in absentia sentence be suspended and that the security restrictions imposed on his client be lifted so he could return to Kuwait and appear before the court.

The court granted both requests.

It also gave the defendant ample time to return and attend the appeal hearings. Despite the measures, however, the defendant failed to appear at any of the hearings leading up to the ruling.

The court therefore concluded that the subsequent regional developments could not reasonably be used as an explanation for his continued absence.

Applying Article 191 of Kuwait’s Criminal Procedures and Trials Law, the court ruled that the defendant’s appeal was null and void.

The defendant had originally been sentenced in absentia in October 2022.

The sentence included:

The case involved allegations of real estate fraud and money laundering.

According to the case details, the defendant was accused of obtaining approximately KD4.54 million from victims by selling residential units and chalets that had allegedly been constructed in violation of their licenses.

The properties were also allegedly built on land that the defendants did not have the legal right to dispose of or develop.

The latest ruling means the defendant’s failure to attend the appeal proceedings resulted in the appeal being invalidated, leaving the court’s previous judgment in place unless further legal procedures are pursued.