Kuwait Metropolis: On Sunday, MP Shuaib Al Muwaizri submitted two interrogation requests, one towards the Minister of Finance, Khalifa Hamada, and one other towards the Minister of International Affairs, Dr. Ahmed Nasser Al Sabah.
Each motions have been filed below the identical clause stating that the 2 ministers didn’t adhere to Article 99 of the Kuwaiti structure which refers to ministers having to reply questions concerning issues that fall inside their purview. As well as, Al Muwaizri mentioned in his movement that the 2 ministers additionally violated article 121 of the parliamentary process legislation (the article is identical as that of the structure).
The speaker of parliament, Marzouq Al Ghanim, introduced that he had obtained the 2 motions and that they are going to be mentioned on the subsequent session which is scheduled after Eid Al Fitr.
A number of deputies got here out and publicly declared their help for the questioning of the 2 ministers.
MP Mohammed Al Mutair, a staunch critic of the federal government, mentioned: “Consistent with my earlier calls for to depart the federal government, particularly after their latest determination to fortify the prime minister in a approach that has not been noticed previously. he historical past of Kuwait, I renew my help for every questioning of any minister, the primary of which is the Prime Minister who abolished the 1962 structure.
Becoming a member of him, MP Faris Al Otaibi mentioned: “Any questioning submitted to a minister of this authorities is deemed worthy of his acceptance and his silence on the intense violations which have violated the structure.”
Time and reasoning
The movement was tabled at a time when tensions between the federal government and opposition figures are at their highest following a vote to postpone all previous and future interrogations filed towards Prime Minister Sabah Al Khaled Al Sabah, till 2022.
Many MPs, together with the general public, claimed that the vote that passed off through the March 30 swearing-in was manipulated and due to this fact the vote was unlawful.
The unprecedented determination to postpone all future motions, angering opposition figures, many calling it “unconstitutional” and “unlawful.”