Kuwait opposition seeks fresh poll

Manama: Kuwait’s sitting parliament speaker said that he would not run as a candidate in the next parliamentary elections.

“I will not take part in the next legislative elections and Kuwait deserves stability following the events that unfolded here,” Jassem Al Khurafi said.

However, opposition members said that they were keen on the elections and called for the dissolution of the controversial parliament elected in 2009 and hold fresh votes to usher in a new legislative body.

Waleed Al Tabatabi, one of the most vociferous lawmakers, said that more street pressure would be applied until the government dissolved the parliament. “If this announcement is not made, the political and popular forces will hold rallies at the Irada Square,” he was quoted as saying by the media.

“If we feel that the parliament dissolution issue is being procrastinated, we will call for a rally as soon as next Monday,” he said, quoted by Arabic daily Al Rai.

Kuwait is still grappling to find a satisfactory solution to the thorny issue of setting up a functioning parliament. The current parliament, elected in 2009, was dissolved in December, but reinstated in June after the Constitutional Court ruled that the decree dissolving it was not constitutional.

The court also ruled that the decree calling for holding elections in February was not in line with the constitution.

The opposition resisted both the rulings by the country’s highest court and, legally unable to challenge them, called for fresh elections. Two attempts by the 2009 parliament to convene and have the government take the oath failed for lack of a quorum after opposition members campaigned against holding any session.

In the second try on August 7, only four of the 50-member house turned up.

“We could not convene the session due to the lack of a quorum and I will not call for another session,” Al Khurafi said.

“I will take the matter to his highness the Emir.” In anticipation of seemingly unavoidable parliamentary elections, the government in August referred the 2006 controversial electoral law to the Supreme Court on suspicion that it breached the constitution and sought to “address legal loopholes” and “ensure a fairer representation of the people in parliament.”

The government was keen on reviewing the clause that had reduced in 2006 the number of constituencies from 25 to five. However, the opposition claimed that the move was part of a conspiracy to give pro-government candidates the edge in new elections. Several leaders organised rallies near the parliament to express their opposition to repelling the electoral law.

On September 25, the court rejected the government’s bid and maintained the five-constituency formula, prompting the opposition to pile up pressure on the government to dissolve the 2009 parliament and hold new elections.

The verdict, hailed by all parties, was seen as a landmark for renewed work for the sake of the country. However, their interpretations of its meaning and implications varied vastly.