12.2.09

Press Freedom and the 'Red Line'

Couldn't agree more with Shamael's article in todays Kuwait Times...

Press Freedom and the 'Red Line'

Published Date: February 12, 2009
By Shamael Al-Sharikh, Staff columnist

The political arena in Kuwait is currently playing host to a heated debate between MPs and some local newspapers. The dispute is over a most revealing characteristic of Kuwaiti life; freedom of the press.

Some newspapers have given their writers and columnists carte blanche to criticize whoever they desire in the most verbally brutal way possible short of actual slander. The targets of these condemnations have mostly been members of Parliament, much to the parliamentarians' disdain. MPs are quite upset at this behavior and have started a political campaign against some newspapers and accused them of being either propaganda tools for wealthy business families or "paid for" from the government's coffers.

MPs have continuously used the term "red line" to illustrate their belief that their job performance should be immune from vicious criticism. They have declared that quality newspapers should not cross the "red line" and should maintain a sense of respect when speaking about elected officials.

The only issue is that there is no "red line" in the Kuwaiti Constitution regarding criticism of MPs. Freedom of speech in Kuwait is a right for both Kuwaitis and residents, and the only three entities that cannot be criticized in writing are God, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and His Highness the Amir. Everyone else is fair game.

Furthermore, recent amendments in press legislation have paved the way for a multitude of newspapers to come into existence. Kuwait now has more than fifteen Arabic daily newspapers in print. This means that competition in the Arabic newspaper market is quite tough. Newspapers have to compete with enticing content for a relatively small readership.

Some newspapers have resorted to heavy reliance on advertising sales to stay afloat and others have resorted to borderline yellow journalism pieces to keep the readers interested. There have been many shocking columns written recently, with topics ranging from editors-in-chief of other newspapers to a condemnation of Hamas' role in the recent Gaza massacre to MPs and their political affiliations.

None of the above is illegal. I have read almost all the columns that have caused a frenzy in the Arabic media, and to be completely honest, some of these pieces were cheap insults directed at MPs whom the columnist did not fancy while others were an embarrassing display of xenophobia and ignorance. In short, they were awful examples of writing, written by awful, mean-spirited writers. But they are not illegal.

In fact, they stand as perfect testament to the freedom of speech we have in Kuwait. Even men with substantial political clout are not immune to public criticism, and Kuwaiti newspapers continue to show that this country has the greatest freedom of speech of record in the Gulf region.

There is no "red line" regarding freedom of speech, and MPs, as ambassadors of our democracy, should be the last people in Kuwait to claim that there are individuals or institutions that cannot be criticized in public. Just as voters chose to vote for a certain MP, so too do they have the right to criticize the MP's performance and to do so in the manner that they choose, provided that they do not perpetrate slander. This is the price of leadership through public office, and MPs should have been well aware
of that before they chose to step into the political arena.

If we start to self-censor because politicians and elected officials should not be criticized, then we have given our ourselves limitations on how to communicate with our elected officials and we have taken away our own right to audit their job performance through Op-Eds (since the country has not implemented the concept of opinion polls just yet).

There are very few things going well in Kuwait at present, but our freedom of the press is one characteristic of Kuwaiti life that we, the people, are unwilling to surrender. MPs must learn to accept criticism and to respond to it with action. If they cannot do that, then they would be doing us all a favor by staying away from public offices and keeping their imaginary "red lines" to mark the borders of their diwaniyas!

Email: shamael@kuwaittimes.net
Very little to add, but 'if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen' does come to mind (even though that expression is often used for expats who say anything negative about Kuwait!). If MPs object to what's written about them, they can always write in and put across their side of the story... I'm sure none of the newspapers would mind that.

11.2.09

Worker's rights

Couldn't agree more...
The rights of workers
Published Date: February 11, 2009
By Muna Al-Fuzai, Staff Columnist

The issue I am writing about today is a nightmare for the many expatriate workers in Kuwait who happen to work for companies that are not concerned with and have no respect for human rights and laws that are meant to protect workers. The absconding cases against helpless workers need to be handled seriously because it is getting out of control and manipulated not only by law enforcement, but by sponsors as well.

I receive complaints every day from friends and relatives of individuals who are worried about the safety and well-being of people who have absconding cases against them. What is really sad is the fact that many of these cases are faked and based on false information provided by the sponsors themselves or by those who represent the companies they work for.

How is the law handling this issue? The worst part is that the police take down all the information about a person who has left his job and consider him a fugitive. I do not believe this is fair because some abusive sponsors believe they can stop giving their workers their salaries, and when the worker becomes fed up and runs away, the sponsor then simply reports the matter to police who then consider the employee a fugitive! Nobody bothers to check if the sponsor's allegations are true or not. If a police officer stops an absconding worker on the street, he would be arrested like a criminal, even if he was walking to a new job that paid him! The falsely accused can find their ways to court and I do recall some cases where employees sued their abusive sponsors instead of absconding.

Some expatriates find themselves in situations where, after coming back to Kuwait after going back to their home country, they are arrested because their sponsors have filed cases against them. This is especially dangerous for them because it is their word against the sponsors. It is no surprise that in most cases the sponsors win, and even if the employee happens to prove his story, the law doesn't take them into consideration.

What worries me here is that the arrested people in such cases are treated like convicted rapists or murderers, which of course is not fair. The process between getting arrested and transferred to a shelter takes weeks, if not months. Some ill-minded sponsors even go so far as to accuse their workers of theft, and their rights are then totally deprived of them and they are treated like criminals even though they are totally innocent!

There is an urgent need to revise the authority given to sponsors over his or her workers' freedom and rights. I believe it is time to make sure that no sponsor issues false allegations against his or employees and it is absolutely necessary for police to make sure that they verify the validity of the complaints issued against them. Why does the law always side with the sponsors and believe they are telling the truth in all cases?

The new labor law is in the process of being passed, but unless we start to give a close look at the sponsorship system, the change will seem partial and ineffective.
muna@kuwaittimes.net
Further change such as scrapping the sponsorship system will be a next step in establishing a legal framework for worker's rights. However, changing peoples hearts and minds to remove blatant discrimination, is a more fundamental change, and until you have leaders in the community who oppose discrimination in all its forms, rather than promote it, this change will be much harder to achieve.

So CBK has done a deal with Dar?

From today's Kuwait Times...
CBK not exposed to Dar, Global
Published Date: February 11, 2009

KUWAIT: Commercial Bank of Kuwait (CBK) said yesterday it was not exposed to troubled firms Investment Dar Co and Global Investment House, its chairman said yesterday. Global Investment House, the country's biggest investment bank, said last month it had defaulted on most of its debt, while Islamic rival Investment Dar said in December it needed up to $1 billion in loans.

Commercial Bank has no exposure to the two firms Investment Dar and Global ... Dar and Global have settled loans owed to CBK," CBK Chairman Abdul-Majeed Al-Shatti told Al Arabiya television. Global has appointed HSBC and CBK Capital, a unit of the country's third-largest lender by market value, to hold talks with creditors. Shatti said Dar had settled its debt after selling its 19.2 percent stake in Islamic lender Boubyan Bank to CBK.

In December, CBK said it had cancelled the deal it reached with Dar in November to buy the Boubyan Bank stake. But Shatti yesterday the deal had not been cancelled. "The deal was not cancelled, we have agreed with Dar to proceed with the deal cancellation," Shatti said, without giving further details. In Kuwait, stakes larger than 5 percent have to be offered to the public in an auction on the bourse. CBK owns the 19.2 percent stake in Boubyan Bank, according to bourse data posted on its website.

Hmmm. A good example of the sham that poses as a financial market in Kuwait. If Kuwait wants to be a financial centre it needs transparency, sensible regulations & rules with penalties for non-compliance, where all shareholders are treated equally and minority interests are protected, where public announcements regarding takeovers, mergers and acquisitions must adhere to quality information standards... instead of these backroom deals being done whereby the participants are presumably benefiting from dealing from insider information... A bit too much to ask?

I hope Mr Shatti has been misquoted... a deal has been done, but it wasn't cancelled, but we have agreed to proceed with deal cancellation... work that one out!