Court orders to pay top official comp in libel suit

From 5-year-jail to acquittal

By Jaber Al-Hamoud

KUWAIT CITY, Oct 25: The Court of Appeals, presided over by Judge Hamoud Al-Mutawa, has instructed the Ministry of Education to pay KD 50,000 compensation to former Head of Examination and Assessments for Private Schools Fawziya Al-Hudhoud for the financial and moral damages she suffered when she was forced to retire without a valid reason.

Al-Hudhoud’s lawyer, Attorney Fawziya Al-Sabah, argued in court that her client is known for her competence and tough stand against administrative malpractices and corruption. The lawyer pointed out that her client blocked some violations in the past. In 2010, she was surprised to receive a letter on her referral for retirement under the pretext that she reached 50 years old.

In 2013, the Court of Cassation overturned the decision and reinstated Al-Hudhoud after proving that the decision to refer her for retirement did not serve public welfare considering her authority as per the Civil Service Commission’s regulations.

Al-Sabah

Four men acquitted:

The Court of Appeals nullified the verdict issued by the Misdemeanor Court of First Instance, which sentenced four citizens to five years in prison with hard labor for allegedly stealing KD 63,400 by force. The appellate court instead acquitted the defendants from all charges.

According to the case file, the Public Prosecution accused the suspects of overpowering a man in Maidan Hawally and violently carting away the sum from his car.

The plaintiff explained that he had placed the money in his car after receiving it. While driving in Maidan Hawally, a jeep hit him from the rear. He was immediately confronted by three men who used a knife to overpower him and they then took the money.

He affirmed that he had a previous misunderstanding with the first and second suspects when the fourth suspect indicated interest in buying his car.

However, counsel to the second defendant Lawyer Zayed Al-Dousari insisted during the court session that the allegation against his client was a deliberate attempt to implicate him.

He said the allegation cannot be proven beyond doubt because the plaintiff could not substantiate that the sum was with him when the incident happened.

Lawyer Al-Dousari reasoned that it was illogical to accuse the defendants of attacking him with weapons in broad daylight in such a densely populated area, concluding by asking, “Is it logical that nobody was there to witness such an incident even if it was by mere coincidence?”

Verdict upheld:

The Court of Appeals upheld the verdict issued by the Court of Instance which acquitted a man of drug consumption, thereby dismissing an appeal filed by the Public Prosecution.

According to the case file, the Public Prosecution accused the suspect of possessing hashish for the purpose of consumption without any authorization from the concerned authorities. He was also accused of driving recklessly under narcotic influence.

However, the defense counsel Lawyer Talal Sabri Al-Enezi, during the court session, stressed that the procedures followed for searching and arresting his client were illegal and void, which was the reason why the lower court had acquitted his client.