WHENEVER an optimistic step is taken in this country, some parliamentarians come with suggestions that draw us back to backwardness. They behave as if they are neither the people of this country nor people who followed the country’s culture, traditions, and heritage. They insist on making Kuwait compete with Afghanistan by closing in on itself, or they work on pushing into adopting the Lebanese or Iraqi model in the country, and for each creed and sect to have its own reference, and its state within the state.

The forces of social backwardness were able to impose their vision on the National Assembly, and seek to amend Article 2 of the Constitution as a prelude to amending Kuwaiti values. That is why they came out to us some time ago with the so-called “negative phenomena”, into which they unfortunately dragged parliamentary blocs and the government for us to have a parliamentary committee in this regard. However, they forgot the Parliamentary Values Committee, which is applicable in the various parliaments of the developed world. These parliamentarians do not want someone to determine on their behalf how the parliamentary practice should be carried out, but they instead seek to shackle society with the restrictions of their moods.

Today, we are facing proposals that, to say the least, are a regression of Kuwaiti values, and a departure from the constitutional principles, which granted these people the right to speak publicly and to be parliamentarians. Instead of benefiting from this right, they deviated from us by making themselves the guardians of the people living on this land. Here we beg to ask - Who gave them this authority? Weren’t the governments the ones that submitted to them, hoping to pass deals so that some ministers would not be held accountable?

Yes, the government is responsible for imposing its decision in accordance with the social culture, and not according to a limited vision. It is the executive authority that the people have accepted to exercise their convictions, not the convictions of some merchants of backward rhetoric. That is why we beg to ask once again - What does it mean to prevent women from assuming judicial work? Why prevent non-veiled women from running for elections? What about their proposals to restore prior censorship of books, strictly prohibit coeducation, and ban festivals and some concerts?

What is the rationale behind the criminalization of tattoos and cosmetic surgery, the strictness in using swimming pools and hotel clubs, and other such proposals that were put forward by a group of MPs who seem to be living in the Middle Ages when the church used to determine who was a believer and who was an atheist, which led to several revolutions in Europe that overthrew regimes and the power of the church?

From the past experience when the parliamentary practice was based on the principle of “scratch my back and I scratch yours”, these “wannabe” politicians were able to pass a large part of their goals. They neither paid any attention to the social cost resulting from that, nor the financial losses incurred by the state as a result of preventing coeducation, nor the repercussions on the national economy due to the systematic closure of the country.

To be frank, these strict controls were the top factor in increasing the demand for narcotics. There was also the temporary emigration abroad with each opportunity given, and the extent to which that entails the national product.

This reminds me of what Ibn Khaldoun said more than 700 years ago, and here I repeat what I wrote on February 13, 2021 - Ibn Khaldoun was neither a soothsayer nor augur. He was just a man who understood the condition of societies and their people, and was blessed with the knowledge and sciences of his time. Seven centuries ago, he wrote, “When nations fall, many astrologers, beggars, hypocrites, pretenders, scribes, cacophony singers and average poets appear, along with agitators, mouthpieces, palm readers, horoscope readers, revelers, politicians, meddlers, satirists and opportunists.”

We say this over and over again because remembrance benefits the believer. Therefore, the Kuwaiti government and people must confront such kinds of proposals because they work on the basis of “give and take” until they have the upper hand, and they then rule according to their vision. This is a major catastrophe that everyone should pay attention to; not only those who oppose the parliament, but the government and all people, because the sword of backwardness will be hanging on their necks, and therefore the deals between the government and those parliamentarians will not work.

By Ahmed Al-Jarallah Editor-in-Chief, the Arab Times