People talk about the government’s decisions, whether they are hypocritical or floundering. Hypocrisy is to say something to a crowd and not believe in it yourself or if you express an idea but you secretly disagree with it. As for whether it is floundering, the government is doing quite the opposite, columnist Ahmed Al-Sarraf wrote in his column in Al Qabas newspaper
When the government invests its money in international companies and draws on the expertise of a competing company this is not a botch, but due to lack of expertise. Furthermore, when the government appeals to the hard-line religious trend and then makes decisions that are very different from this trend, it is not considered a truce, but hypocrisy that we absolve our government of.
The government has officially announced, through the attorney general, the appointment of 8 women judges, in a long-awaited historical precedent. The decision was seen as the culmination of the efforts of women, and to fill a judicial vacuum. Mrs. Lulwa Al-Mulla, President of the Women’s Cultural Association, described the decision as placing Kuwait in the ranks of developed countries, and this is exactly what the forces of darkness do not want! In turn, Othman Al-Khamis, who is known for his conservative views and opinions, and influencing naive listeners on topics commented on the news saying: “ It is not permissible for a ruler to be a woman.
It is not permissible for a woman to take over the judiciary, because a woman’s testimony is worth half of the testimony of a man, so how can she be a judge Legitimately? If her testimony is half in some transactions and within the limits, her testimony is not accepted at all, so how does she become a judge? And I say this is not a “diminution” in a woman, but rather because a woman has an emotion that she has overcome, and therefore not suitable for her to be the guardian of the Muslims”.
This male preacher can express his opinion about this enlightened decision, but how does the state allow itself to open the way for him to criticize the decision and to degrade this decision publicly through governmental means, when it contradicts the law? How do you expect the nation to respond to the words of this preacher who was able to make these statements through the government.
Are they not entitled to accuse the government of duality and confusion, to pacify the hard-line religious movement on the one hand and to shun it on the other hand? What would the position of the appointed female judges be when they hear the statements made from a legal point of view challenging their validity? The understanding is we need to behave wisely towards them, and they should consider not expressing anything that might be taken as a transgression on the foundation of the state of Kuwait and its laws, and to stop behaving as if we are a nation that fails to comprehend our culture, and they are the ones who rule over us.
The appointment decision also showed the Brotherhood’s contradictions for the umpteenth time. Their representative in the National Assembly, Muhammad Al-Dalal, blessed the appointment of female judges, considering that their arrival to this position is a major historical step. The other brothers, Ajeel Al-Nashmi, opposed it, saying that it is not right for a woman to be a judge, and if she issues a ruling, it is considered a “public scourge”. Between Al-Nashmi’s position on the decision and describing the female judges ruling as a “public scourge”, and his party colleague Muhammad Al-Dalal described this decision as a “historic step”, a huge contrast and clear confusion, how can you hand over the rein of the “department” in a ministry to the followers of this party, let alone you hand them over the reigns of state rule?