Defending honour, dignity
Youth acquitted of abuse
By Jaber Al-Hamoud
KUWAIT CITY, Feb 12: The Criminal Court acquitted a youth who was accused of attacking and insulting a Kuwaiti citizen in a public place for sexually harassing his sister.
The Public Prosecution had charged the youth with assaulting a citizen, causing multiple injuries and humiliating him in public. The counsel to the citizen Lawyer Elaf Al-Saleh denied the charges, indicating that it does not make sense that her client initiated the fight considering the huge age gap and difference in body structure of her client and the plaintiff.
She explained that her client was defending the honor and dignity of his sister as the plaintiff had been frequently harassing her to get her number and asking her to add him on SnapChat in order to see her personal videos and pictures. In fact, it was the plaintiff who insulted her client’s family when he was told to stop harassing the girl.
Lawyer Al-Saleh stressed that the case lacks incriminating evidences against her client, and the investigations of the arresting officer were not conclusive to affirm her client attacked and insulted the plaintiff.
Verdict nullified:
Al-Saleh
The Misdemeanor Court of Appeals has nullified the verdict of the Court of First Instance, which sentenced a Kuwaiti blogger to 60 days in prison and KD 5,000 fine for insulting and abusing an Arabic language teacher whom he purportedly described as an electronic sheep in a Tweet.
The Public Prosecution Department charged the suspect for insulting the teacher openly via social media in a manner that dented his personal dignity and status. The teacher said the suspect was fond of using hashtag to talk about Arabic test with the rude phrase “electronic sheep”. He accused the suspect of writing the phrase steadily for almost one year. Lawyer Abdul-Mohsen Al-Qattan representing the defendant argued there wasn’t sufficient evidence to establish that his client had actually committed the crime. He cited Article 6 of the Law No. 63/2015 concerning cyber crimes, Article 70 of the Law No. 37/2014 concerning establishment of the Communications Regulatory Authority, and Article 7 of Law No. 3/2006 concerning printing and publications.
Appeal rejected:
The Cassation Court Monday rejected an appeal submitted by 13 individuals against the verdict of the Court of Appeals which sentenced them to two-year imprisonment for using words deemed offensive to the Amiri entity by quoting from or spreading the infamous speech titled “Enough of Frivolity” by the former MP Musallam Al-Barrak.
The court ordered a three-year suspension of the ruling and a financial guarantee of KD 3,000 each along with a pledge to maintain good conduct.
The defendants are among the 21 individuals who are accused of spreading or quoting from the infamous speech, which, according to the judiciary, contains words that are deemed offensive to the entity of His Highness the Amir of Kuwait.
The prosecution urged the court to impose the toughest punishment on the defendants, which is five years in prison with hard labor.
Al-Barrak had served a jail term of two years with hard labor for giving the controversial speech at Erada Square, but all other defendants are denying the charges leveled against them.
In the same context, the Civil Court has ordered Ministry of Justice to pay compensation worth KD 41,000 to MP Faraj Al-Arbeed for the damages caused by the ministry through its mistake in counting the votes in the last general elections, and its failure to pronounce Al-Ajmi as the winner. The verdict came in accordance with the verdict issued by the Constitutional Court in this regard in May 2017.
Emotional harm:
The Court of First Instance obligated a Kuwaiti citizen to pay KD 5,000 to an investigator of Ministry of Interior Sultan Al-Qahtani for the emotional harms he sustained when the citizen humiliated him while he was doing his job.
The investigator filed a lawsuit against the citizen, explaining that the latter visited his office for investigation of a traffic accident. When the investigator referred the issue to the technical expert to identify who caused the accident, the citizen rejected the decision and started shouting at the investigator.
When he asked the citizen to leave the office, he refused. The investigator then informed him that he will take legal actions against him, which further infuriated the latter and he began using insulting words against the investigator.