November 2009 Archives

Kleptocracy is a form of political corruption that refers to a state in which politicians exploit natural resources in order to stay in power. Does that sound similar to something that's been happening in Kuwait these days?

To answer "Yes" would be to disregard the nature of Kuwait's society as an Arab and Muslim caretaker ethos.

It is written in our Holy Book as Muslims that people should spend their wealth towards the benefit of the larger society whenever they can. Religiously, it's Zakat, where the Muslims pay their annual tax either directly to people in need (at the discretion of the Zakat payer)or in some cases towards a central collections authority that then distributes it to betterment of the society, by way of social development, through schools, hospitals, mosques, homes, etc...Wealthy people with hearts of gold race each other to build something that would benefit society, especially in Kuwait. Examples range from renovating hospital wards, building schools, educational endowments and scholarships, all the way to providing free housing and job opportunities.

To answer "NO" would be to ignore the fact that Kuwait's wealth is solely built upon one natural resource: Oil.

This resource is controlled by the state, its production and sale is controlled by the state, and the revenue it generates is distributed by the state, the distribution process is performed by way of paid salaries, social allowances and benefits. There is no "Free Money" in the Government's Monetary cycle. This means that anyone who works for the state will earn enough money to stay safe and housed, but would never earn enough money to become rich enough to run for political office.

So the first question in this logic is, how does a Kuwaiti Politician become a Kleptocrat in a supposed Democracy?

The First route is the simplest: Active Networking. You make enough friends and acquaintances to build a large enough network of supporters that would vote you into office. How that happens is too lengthy for this post, but think "Tribal/Sectarian/Primary Elections" and you get the picture. They would then support you financially and politically.

The Second route is more difficult: Passive Networking. You build up your reputation as a capable and fierce supporter of justice and equality so much that it becomes visible to the masses, who will turn towards you for assistance and guidance. You then make your way up to the top, only this time it's due to your hard work and reputation, not your connections and affiliations. This is a textbook example of how a Democracy should be held; the power of the people would select the most ideal candidate to represent them, based on principles, morale standing and reputation.

The Third route is Nomination: An individual or a group would appoint you as their representative, and would then mobilize all of their resources to support you into office. Once there, you'd be doing their bidding as their representative in Government. It's closely connected to Active Networking, but without the means nor the skills to to so. This may be acceptable in may Democracies, especially where Political parties and affiliations are admissible.

The Fourth route is Hereditary: You're born into government and rule by association. Examples include Kingdoms, Sheikhdoms and hereditary Republics. Your Mommy or Daddy ruled over everyone, and when they die, their authority reverts to you, barring the presence of any legal framework that would prevent, undermine or limit the extent your authority (such as a Constitution).

The Fifth and Final route is Money: You buy your way into Politics. This is the most corrupt and dangerous route into politics. Your constituents are composed of paid mouths who will sing your praises for a fee, or people already in power that you have packed into your shirt pocket, or legal representatives who will manipulate the Law in order to facilitate your ascension to Political power.

In this context, consider all the present Members of Parliament and the Government currently in office, would any of them fall under a different category? Hardly! Some of them are an actual and clear embodiment of some or all of these descriptions.

Case in Point: HADAS, Salafists, Popular Action Bloc, National Democratic Alliance, they're all political affiliations and de-facto political parties who nominate the most suitable candidate from among them and support this candidate into office to represent them. The problem is, these parties do not enjoy the benefit of a legal acknowledgement under the current Kuwaiti Law, nor do they represent the masses in terms of their political agenda, but, rather simply, they enjoy the generalized affiliation of the masses who have shared principles and the perceived moral standing of their members.

In other words, "I'm a Salafist, so I'll vote for XX the Salafist in my constituency", or "I've taken out a large Bank Loan, so I'll vote for the Popular Action Bloc whose agenda will force the Government to write off all Consumer Loans". Generally speaking, it's as simple as that!

On the other had, those in Government, namely those in the "Hereditary" offices, will strive to protect their personal and political interests from those that strive to attack them, so they utilize their wealth and political power in order to attain their goals. Currently, MP Faisal Al Muslim is trying to prove this is the case with the Prime Minister.

MP Al Muslim raises a difficult question: If you're not from a wealthy merchant family, but you've managed to use your personal wealth to protect your political position in Government, taking into account that you're only source of income 'should have been' your salary, how can you afford to spend so much money to protect your interests? But the MP raises yet another question: If you've risen only from among the masses within your tribal, sectarian or regular connections - who support and assist your endeavors - what gives you the right to attack the Prime Minister in the name of the People with documents you've obtained under shady circumstances?! I believe that MP Al Muslim was trying to prove that the Prime Minister was a Kleptocrat, who usurps his position, power and wealth in order to control and manipulate the Parliament.

As a person who has intimate knowledge of the Kuwaiti Banking Sector, I'm fully aware of the legal penalties that entail the exposure of private information and/or documents within the Bank; I have seen, first-hand, what happens to people who do 'these things', willingly or otherwise. Not only is it in complete violation of the employee's contract with the bank, let alone sickeningly unprofessional, but more seriously, it's a betrayal of the employer, the people and shareholders you work for, and may well get you into prison, destroying your reputation completely without even the slightest chance of redemption.

Constitutionally, if proven correct, the documents pertinent to this case allude to a clause within Article 111 of the Kuwaiti Constitution, which states:

"Article 111: Except in cases of flagrante delicto, no measures of inquiry, search, arrest, detention, or any other penal measure may be taken against a member while the Assembly is in session, except with the authorisation of the Assembly." ("Flagrante delicto" means "Caught in the act of a misdeed").

I'm no lawyer, but I imagine that if it's proven that the documents in MP Al Muslim's possession are authentic, it stands to reason that they have reached him via unauthorized means, which means clearly he's caught red-handed in the crime of possessing private and personal documents. Moreover, he would also be guilty of committing a crime by association of the person who had given him these documents in the first place, and if both these crimes are proven against MP Al Muslim in court, they make the case against the Prime Minster completely illegal since the evidence against him was obtained illegally, and is therefore inadmissible in court.

What remains in question is where did the money came from? Let's assume I'm one of those tree-hugging-love all-live all-people who claim that if it were from the Prime Minister's personal funds, then so be it; he's a kind-hearted person who likes to spend his wealth helping people (and it's his personal wealth that he's using) so any suspicion of misusing public funds gets thrown out the window. But then again, why pay an MP (he did not run for reelection this time) when that person has no clear use for that amount of money? His income is secured by way of his pension from the Parliament, so he's pretty well financed and secured. Moreover, many former MP's become board members of private companies, with very beefy salaries, or revert back to the family business, if one exists. So what's this payment all about?

And finally, what gives MP Al Muslim - a representative of the people - the right to use illegally obtained documents as 'evidence' against the Prime Minister's ''misuse of public funds''? If anything, this case proves what I've been blogging about all along; Proper reforms come from proper voting. Representation should be based on holistic needs and demands, not sectarian nor tribal agendas. MP Al Muslim may have shocked the state's perceptions of the extent of corruption, some may say, but others may also claim that he's unsuccessfully tried to prove what we all know; People in Power are liable to be corrupt, no matter what side of the law they may be standing on. His Immunity as an MP made him believe he's untouchable, while simultaneously trying to prove the same about the Prime Minister.

Power corrupts - and absolute power corrupts absolutely - and that goes for MP Al Muslim too!

Give me a month. Any given month, just one month without a horror story, give me a month in which no one makes a medical error, one month in which we don't hear about some person's horror story at the hands of evil doctors and the henchmen in nurse's outfits.

Chances are you can't, because there aren't any. Medical errors are seemingly inevitable, they have to happen, just like car accidents and farting in public, mistakes happen. They are part and parcel of having healthcare. After all; unlike the airline industry and the people who make the iphone we don't really have a blueprint or a service manual.

This is why I'm using the bible of all medical error literature to date - and the keystone of America's healthcare revolution - to prove my point. The U.S. Institute of Medicine white paper entitled "To Err is Human ...." estimates that between 44,000 and 98,000 people die from medical errors in the US annually. That's more than the people heart attacks and strokes combined kill in Kuwait and is more than those who are killed by breast cancer in the US.

Having said that the study was written in 1999 and the number would probably be three times as high this year if it weren't for the boffins who wrote the document and forced people to follow it.

There's another reason why I chose this study, it's because we have the same problem as the US. We have lots of doctors, lots of hospitals/practices and not enough oversight (three exams make you registered to practice, 2 more make you a specialist in the US and you can do all five without looking at a patient) so I figured their answer would be ours. After all, we've imported everything from ketchup to coffee chains and managed to make them work, might as well do the same for policy; besides we know it works because they've managed to reduce medical errors to about 10% of the original number over ten years.

The study looked into every major medical error, every big lawsuit and settlement and every single post mortem they could find and came up with the following:

• They found that medical errors occur in three stages: failure to diagnose (wrong tests, wrong timing of tests, old and redundant tests), failure in treatment(delay in treatment, lack of drugs, technical error during a procedure) and failure in prevention (lack of patient follow-up, lack of foresight given patients current condition)

• Creating a nationwide program for leadership, research, tools, and protocols to enhance the knowledge base about safety and patient awareness. In other words, integrating administration into day to day healthcare and making it part and parcel of the practice of medicine.

• Developing a nationwide public mandatory reporting system and by encouraging health care organi­zations and practitioners to develop and participate in voluntary reporting systems meaning that you need to report any problems you face without being blamed for them directly and providing the manpower required to piece together the sequence of the events that lead to the problem.

• Providing standards to adhere to and aspire to within each branch of healthcare. As it stands we don't provide doctors with job descriptions when they are hired, only a set of arbitrary rules.

• Putting in place safety systems in health care organizations to ensure safe practices at the delivery level.

The point I'm trying to make with this whole post is the fact that in all of the above not a single doctor/nurse/security guard was beaten, sued or had his license stripped. If anything the strategy outlined tell you to go back and hold yourself accountable for what you've done and find out where you went wrong and how to fix it then share what you've learnt with the people you work with so that the same mistake doesn't happen again.

I am quick to point out however that the study doesn't condone negligence in which someone has made a deliberate error that they should not have (i.e. cutting a nerve because it simplifies the surgery or giving a patient an overdose so that they sleep and leave you alone for the night only to find them not breathing in the morning).

So perhaps the newspaper stories, TV interviews and patient export program may not be quiet as effective (or affective ....still can't tell the difference) as teaching medical students and doctors in training to review medications they've given and procedures they've performed and sharing their experiences with their colleagues.........

Oh well ...I'm not holding my breath...

The Study mentioned can be found on Google books but be for-warned it's about 300 pages long .......

I received the following press release from Hussa Al-Humeidhi from 'Sout Al-Kuwait,' concerning the anniversary of the Kuwait Constitution:

"Sout Al-Kuwait is a civic lobby group protecting personal and social freedoms through the activation and preservation of the rights stipulated in the Kuwaiti constitution. The Group meets its target through organized media campaigns, public relations and direct communication with the Parliament member and other State decision makers. Since its establishment, the Group published several booklets and brochures providing simplified review of constitutional rights, their impact and importance, and their conflict with some of the current legislations - (available on www.soutalkuwait.com). Sout Al-Kuwait also participated in several exhibitions, rallies, and carnivals in an attempt to educate the youth about the Constitution articles and relate them to our daily lives. We lead several educational activities in schools, colleges and universities introducing students to concepts like citizenship, human rights, constitutional rights and encouraging their involvement in volunteer civic and social work.

One of our most important events is the celebration of the anniversary of the Constitution of Kuwait which was signed off by Sheikh Abdullah Al-Salem in November 11, 1962. This year we plan a grand carnival in front of the Kuwait Parliament (Sahat Al Irada). This event will be a collaborative effort by other NGOs and some civic groups. It is a family event filled with activities suitable to all ages and interests. There will be a special area for children and another for art and poetry national music band lead by Belal Al-Shami and many other outdoor activities. Participants will be taken through the amazing journey of the Constitution in a fun and friendly environment.

We hope that you and your family will join us celebrating the Constitution anniversary this year on Wednesday, November 11 in front of the Parliament from 5:30 to 10 pm".

We salute this initiative and wholeheartedly support it and the stellar work these lobby groups are doing to promote democracy and civil liberties in Kuwait.