The Kuwaiti people have finished casting their votes for members of the National Assembly’s 15th legislative term amid a state of political instability. Kuwaitis headed to the ballot boxes for the seventh time since 2003. The country’s parliament was dissolved in 2006, 2008, 2009 and 2016 and dissolved by a Constitutional Court decision in 2012 and 2013. 

Elections Background

The recent elections were held after five years of widespread popular protests that started at the end of 2011 following accusations of corruption against the executive and legislative powers. The allegations came after reports that the bank balances of National Assembly members had increased by millions of dinars and as large sums were discovered to be transferred abroad with no legal justification and with ambiguity surrounding the beneficiaries. 

Legislative elections were held in February 2012, in which the opposition won an absolute majority,  prompting the government to appeal the Assembly’s constitutional legitimacy, and unilaterally amend the electoral system by reducing the number of votes voters could cast from four to one in each of the five constituencies, consequently preventing an opposition parliamentary majority. 

In protest of this government decision, the political opposition called on religious and liberal political movements, as well as many independent national figures, to boycott the elections. Their calls were answered in a low turnout rate (40 per cent) for the first “one person one vote” elections held in December 2012. The elections were declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, which also granted immunity to the “one person one vote” system. These events paved the way for the modest participation of some boycotting political movements during the following elections in 2013. 

The Assembly that resulted from the 2013 election was very much for the government, allowing it to pass most of their proposed laws and procedures, mainly increasing oil prices and subsidies for certain goods and services, increasing energy costs, imposing fees on public services, and removing financial facilities granted to many professions. The Parliament further passed several laws restricting freedoms aimed at opposition movements and figures, such as imposing limitations on National Assembly candidatures, a cybercrime law, a law allowing preventive detention in opinion cases, and a law on the genetic imprint. The Assembly then fiercely attacked and removed several interrogations submitted to the Prime Minister and certain ministries from the agenda, prompting five MPs to resign in protest of eliminating the parliament’s monitoring powers.  

With so little supervision, the Assembly, which had failed to meet the people’s demands, was highly criticized. As a result, an unprecedented announcement was made to dissolve it while in recess. The decision was based on regional circumstances and developments in the Arab world, although many observers viewed the justification as strange and surprising. Voters once again headed to the ballot boxes on November 27, 2016, in what became the shortest period of election campaigning compared to the usual two months. 

What the 2016 elections indicate

The 2016 elections were very indicative, and their results might reshape Kuwait’s political scene. They are worth being analyzed in a bid to uncover what the future might hold for Kuwaiti democracy: 

1. A Large turnout from male and female voters in all electoral districts. The participation rate exceeded 70 per cent for the first time since the 1992 elections that followed Kuwait’s liberation from Iraq, which could help revive the democratic process in the country after more than two decades of stagnation.
2. Widespread popular discontent expressed as anger towards the 2013 Assembly. Change dominated the election results: 50 per cent in the first district, 40 per cent in the second, 70 per cent in the third, 80 per cent in the fourth and 60 per cent in the fifth, which means the winning of 34 new MPs (60 per cent) and the voting out of many pro-government MPs.
3. The disbanding of the so-called “invalidating majority.” The political opposition that first emerged during the 2012 elections, including political powers and opposition symbols from the previous elections, have been disbanded. Its popularity has apparently declined with many opposition candidates losing or winning by a small margin.
4. The Salafi movement suffered a complete loss. No candidate from the Salafi movement was elected, which may be due to the movement’s internal divisions, a continued boycott of its more conservative wing, or the movement’s endorsement of candidates from other political factions. Nonetheless, the Muslim Brotherhood secured four seats; most won through voting by tribal affiliation rather than through the organization and its supporters.
5. Lessened sectarian Sunni-Shiite discourse among candidates. This type of discourse continued to be heard but to a far lesser extent and was limited to only a few candidates. Of course, this won’t eliminate sectarian speech from Parliament but will reduce it significantly compared with the last four assemblies, perhaps reflecting its diminished importance compared with issues that affect the people’s daily lives.  
6. Shiite MPs lose three seats, retreating nine to six. This loss could be explained by either the higher number of Shiite candidates in some districts with a large Shiite population or by the increased turnout in individual constituencies where Shiite candidates previously had won even during the widespread election boycott. A further explanation can be that voters wanted a change from the familiar pro-government faces who have continuously supported decisions harmful to the Kuwaiti people.
7. Diminished parliamentary representation of the largest tribes. Tribes such as al-Mutayr and Al-Awazem suffered losses in districts where they had a vast majority (the fourth and fifth districts respectively) as a result of the one person one vote system, which gave smaller tribes the opportunity to organize and settle on a single candidate. Large tribes were not as successful in municipal elections, and many of their members have refused to acknowledge the results. Many candidates from these tribes ran independently, free from any tribal affiliations, while others ran under the banner of a tribe already weakened by the new electoral system.
8. Women secured one seat only after being completely absent from the last two assemblies. Despite the large female turnout, only one woman was elected to the National Assembly. This result can be attributed to the lack of female candidates or to the fact that few female candidates with political experience ran for parliament, and that women in Kuwait still find it difficult to vote for female candidates. The results some female candidates managed to secure were promising but not sufficient enough to launch any significant change.
9. The opposition is the latest elections’ real winner. The number of MPs who explicitly criticized government performance during their electoral campaigns exceeded 24 representatives, which might constitute a parliamentary majority capable of overthrowing the government or some of its ministers through votes of confidence during parliamentary interrogations. This bloc may grow even further and include members from the traditional Islamic opposition, from the liberal opposition and reformers and anti-corruption advocates in general. Its strength may even increase if it agrees with a national agenda with factors common to the various segments of Kuwaiti society.
10. One of the most significant results of the 2016 elections is the rise of young candidates. They displayed great ability using a political discourse attracting voters and revealing courage to tackle sensitive issues, while also proposing solutions to long-standing problems and reinforcing hope in development. Their victory came as a surprise as they received a high number of votes and competed with experienced candidates representing significant political movements. 

Having more young people in the coming National Assembly will increase political enthusiasm as the young representatives seek to prove themselves through excellent performance and overcoming challenges. They will help usher in a new political culture that is more in touch with today’s requirements and the needs of the silent majority. The results will also open the door to more youth, whether in the political field or otherwise, and will reshape Kuwaiti democracy. Most importantly, it will be a real test for the next government.