1.1264924-3171067767
Prominent opposition leader and former MP Mussallam al-Barrak (C) and former Kuwaiti MP Ahmad al-Sadoun (C-L) celebrate with opposition activists after a Kuwaiti court acquitted them alongside 70 opposition activists including nine former MPs of charges of storming the parliament building in the oil-rich Gulf state two years ago in Kuwait city on December 9, 2013. "All the defendants were found not guilty" of charges of storming a public building, assaulting police, resisting orders and damaging public property, in the ruling by judge Hisham Abdullah. AFP PHOTO / YASSER AL-ZAYYAT Image Credit: AFP

Manama: A Kuwaiti court on Monday acquitted the 70 defendants, including 11 former lawmakers, in the case of the parliament storming.

The case has been in the court for over a year and a half and the verdict was welcomed with great relief in the country.

“All the defendants were found not guilty” of charges of storming a public building, assaulting police, resisting orders and damaging public property, in the ruling by judge Hisham Abdullah.

Charges included breaking the laws, illegal assembly, disobeying police orders, resisting arrest, assaulting public order officers and parliament security servicemen and damaging property.

Opposition activists rejoiced Monday’s ruling immediately after it was announced, filling social networks, especially Twitter, with comments and congratulations.

Prominent opposition leader and former MP Mussallam Al Barrak celebrated the acquittals at his residence, just southwest of Kuwait City, along with dozens of activists by holding up four fingers, a salute adopted by supporters of Egypt’s deposed Islamist president Mohammad Mursi.

“Thank God for this ruling. We are very satisfied,” said Mohammad Al Humaidi, director of the Kuwait Society for Human Rights who had defended a number of the activists.

“All Kuwaitis were waiting for this verdict ... which is so crucial for the future of the country,” Humaidi said.

He said that during the trial, which continued for around 20 months, defence lawyers had argued that the defendants had no criminal intent when they entered parliament.

“It was a protest against corruption by the state,” he said. In addition, there were contradictions in the testimonies of witnesses.

The case was filed after dozens of people forced their way into the parliament’s debating chamber in November 2011 while hundreds of people protested outside to call for the resignation of the government, then chaired by Shaikh Nasser Al Mohammad.

The nation was subsequently divided over the merit of the unprecedented storming as several people pushed for stringent legal action against protesters while others defended it as acceptable street pressure.

The suspects denied that they forced their way in and insisted that the doors were open when they reached the building after being re-routed by security servicemen.

The protesters had planned to head to the prime minister’s residence, but after they were prevented from continuing their way, they opted to go to the parliament.

Shaikh Nasser resigned two weeks after the incident and the Emir called for fresh parliamentary elections.