“Family and life stability is part of the public interest.” This statement summarizes the ruling on a lawsuit filed against the decision of the Public Authority for Housing Welfare (PAHW) to terminate the usufruct contracts and evacuate the houses occupied by families and belonging to the citizens who sold their houses.
According to the reasoning behind the ruling, public interest cannot be determined by the administration acting independently of the judiciary. The justice upon which Kuwaiti court rulings are based is a path that no one can deviate from. The reasoning is clear, emphasizing the inviolability of legal status based on laws, as it is fundamental to achieving justice. As per the ruling of the court, the eviction of 509 families from their homes is contrary to justice.
The fate of these families cannot be subject to the mood of an official or to an inaccurate interpretation that contradicts the purpose of the law. Therefore, it would have been more appropriate for the beneficiaries to stay in their homes until the PAHW provides suitable options. In fact, there are several criticisms of the current housing welfare process, most notably its failure to consider developments over the past 40 years, particularly those experienced by neighboring Gulf and non-Gulf countries. Housing in Kuwait is based on the ‘land and loan’ model. This approach pushes citizens into the complexities of construction and borrowing from commercial banks. In the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia and Oman, there are more beneficial approaches for both the state and its citizens.
The government undertakes the construction of cities and identifies beneficiaries, providing diverse financing and housing options. The available options include allowing beneficiaries to build their own homes, purchase homes in state-built cities, receive plots, and access affordable housing for the most vulnerable.
In all cases, the state provides the plots. These countries have overcome what used to be a complex housing crisis until recently, while the housing issue in Kuwait remains, as the number of housing applications far exceeds the capacity to address the issue under the current system. At one point, the political situation dictated the crisis, which delayed the conclusion of solutions.
However, the situation has changed, meaning we must work on two tracks. First is adopting a modern vision that aligns with developments in the region and the world, moving away from outdated housing practices. Second is learning from the experience of neighboring countries that resolved their housing crisis within a few years. Kuwait has been doing well since the liberation, with the state aiming to strengthen citizens’ feeling of social stability as a foundation for development.
There is much that can be done to achieve sustainable development, one that is not subject to the whims of any official or to misinterpretations that threaten the legal status of Kuwaiti families, especially those affected by the ‘those who sold their homes’ law. Citizens who sold their homes took this step under harsh circumstances, which forced them to move from owning a home to renting a property through usufruct rights.
The court stated in its recent ruling that repealing an article of the law does not necessitate terminating legally concluded contracts. The court ruling is clear in establishing rights that cannot be disputed, because doing so is a violation of Article Nine of the Constitution. This ruling sets a precedent that should be built upon to achieve justice in its best form. Thank you, Kuwaiti judiciary for saving families from homelessness.
