Decree‑Law No. 79 of 2026, issued by the Amir of Kuwait, strips naturalized citizens of the right to vote, run for office, or hold appointed seats in representative bodies. This measure entrenches permanent disenfranchisement based solely on origin, raising grave concerns about non‑discrimination, civic equality, and the right to participate in public affairs. Unless repealed, the decree institutionalizes exclusion and warrants scrutiny within the wider pattern of structural restrictions on civic and political life in Kuwait.

Background

On 23 August 2026, Amir Mishal Al‑Ahmad Al‑Jaber Al‑Sabah issued Decree‑Law No. 79 of 2026, published the following day in the official gazette (Kuwait Al‑Yawm, Issue 1805, Supplement), entering into force immediately. Article 2 of the decree amends Article 7 of the Nationality Law by adding: “A person who has acquired Kuwaiti nationality by naturalization shall not have the right to vote, run for office, or be appointed to any representative body.” The text provides no sunset clause, statutory review mechanism, or pathway for restoring political rights.

Previously, naturalized citizens could vote after twenty years of citizenship, while Law No. 32 of 1995 barred them from standing for election or accepting appointments to representative assemblies. Decree‑Law No. 79 of 2026 extends these restrictions into a comprehensive and permanent deprivation, encompassing all three dimensions of political representation.

This measure builds upon prior legislative changes. Under Decree‑Law No. 52 of 2026, issued in April, minor children of naturalized citizens, as well as children born after their father’s naturalization, were formally classified as citizens by naturalization. Individuals who had previously acquired citizenship by derivation were likewise reclassified. As a result, the newly imposed political disenfranchisement now extends to persons who obtained nationality automatically at birth or during childhood.

The promulgation of Decree‑Law No. 79 of 2026 occurred amid wider structural transformations in Kuwait’s institutional framework. On 10 May 2024, the National Assembly was dissolved and key constitutional provisions suspended for up to four years, transferring legislative authority directly to the Amir and the Council of Ministers. In May 2026, legislation dissolved the elected Municipal Council and converted it into a fully appointed body. At the same time, authorities have carried out sweeping campaigns revoking citizenship from tens of thousands of individuals since 2024, reinforced by amendments designating nationality decisions as sovereign acts beyond judicial review.

Institutional Position

The blanket disenfranchisement of naturalized citizens entrenches an arbitrary distinction within the body politic, establishing a permanent hierarchy of rights based on origin rather than conduct or legal capacity. Subjecting citizens who share identical legal duties, taxation obligations, and allegiance to differential treatment in political participation undermines the democratic principle of equal citizenship.

The explanatory memorandum to Decree‑Law No. 79 of 2026 invokes Article 82 of the Kuwaiti Constitution—which requires members of the National Assembly to be original‑born Kuwaitis—framing the measure as a reaffirmation of “national identity.” Yet Article 82 regulates eligibility for parliamentary candidacy only; it does not authorize restrictions on voting rights, nor does it extend to all representative bodies. Expanding candidacy qualifications into a blanket denial of suffrage exceeds the scope of Article 82. Constitutional provisions must be interpreted in harmony with foundational guarantees, notably Article 6 (sovereignty rests with the people), Article 7 (justice, liberty, and equality as pillars of society), and Article 29 (equality in dignity, rights, and public duties before the law).

Collective political exclusion fails the tests of necessity, proportionality, and non‑discrimination. Measures justified on grounds of national security or administrative integrity must target proven individual wrongdoing through due process, not impose group‑level restrictions. Conditioning political rights on the method of citizenship acquisition penalizes individuals irrespective of conduct and, when applied across generations, locks families into a permanently subordinate legal status.

The timing of this decree raises grave concerns about reconfiguring the electorate prior to any restoration of parliamentary life. Foundational alterations to electoral qualifications by executive decree—during the suspension of the elected legislature and following the conversion of the Municipal Council into an appointed body—preclude public debate and representative oversight, eroding safeguards essential to the rule of law.

Applicable Legal Framework

Kuwait is a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 25 guarantees every citizen the right and opportunity to participate in public affairs, to vote, and to be elected at genuine periodic elections based on universal and equal suffrage, without unreasonable restrictions. Article 26 further enshrines equality before the law and equal protection against discrimination.

The UN Human Rights Committee, in General Comment No. 25, affirms that political rights under Article 25 must be open to all adult citizens, and that distinctions between native‑born and naturalized citizens raise serious compatibility concerns with the Covenant. Kuwait’s reservation to Article 25(b), entered upon accession in 1996, addressed electoral provisions restricting voting and candidacy to men and excluding armed forces and police personnel. It does not authorize new, permanent bans against entire categories of citizens. In all circumstances, the overarching obligations of non‑discrimination and equality under Articles 2 and 26 remain binding.

At the national level, the restriction conflicts with the systemic architecture of the Kuwaiti Constitution. Transforming a limited candidacy condition under Article 82 into an absolute bar on voting and representation breaches the structural guarantees of popular sovereignty (Article 6) and civic equality (Articles 7 and 29).

Demands Aligned with International Human Rights Standards