<\/p>\n
A counterterrorism law enacted in Kuwait\u00a0in the wake of Iranian\u00a0strikes on the Gulf, following the unlawful US-Israeli attacks on\u00a0Iran,\u00a0contains overly broad and vague provisions that threaten\u00a0the rights to\u00a0freedom of\u00a0expression,\u00a0peaceful assembly,\u00a0association\u00a0and movement, while significantly expanding the scope of the death penalty, Amnesty International said today.\u00a0<\/p>\n
On 15 March\u00a02026, the Emir of Kuwait issued Decree-Law No. 47 of 2026 on Combating Terrorism Crimes, which adopts an overly broad and vague definition of \u2018terrorist\u2019 acts. The\u00a0counterterrorism\u00a0law forms\u00a0part of a\u00a0sweeping\u00a0package of legal\u00a0and judicial\u00a0measures\u00a0introduced in March 2026\u00a0shortly after\u00a0the Iran war\u00a0began\u00a0in the name of \u201ccountering\u00a0terrorism\u201d.\u00a0Measures\u00a0include\u00a0the establishment of a specialized prosecution\u00a0branch\u00a0and\u00a0specially designated\u00a0courts\u00a0for\u00a0terrorism-related\u00a0charges, as well as\u00a0significantly expanding the scope of the death penalty\u00a0for \u201cterrorist acts.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\nNational\u00a0security\u00a0must not be\u00a0used as a justification to trample on rights and expand\u00a0state powers,\u00a0and\u00a0responding to any legitimate threats must be\u00a0pursued in a manner consistent with international law.<\/p>\n
Mahmoud Shalaby, Amnesty International<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\u201cNational\u00a0security\u00a0must not be\u00a0used as a justification to trample on rights and expand\u00a0state powers,\u00a0and\u00a0responding to any legitimate threats must be\u00a0pursued in a manner consistent with international law.\u00a0Kuwaiti authorities\u00a0introduced counterterrorism\u00a0legislation\u00a0that\u00a0expands the scope of the death penalty\u00a0and\u00a0permits\u00a0punitive\u00a0and arbitrary\u00a0restrictions on\u00a0freedom of\u00a0movement\u00a0and association\u00a0for people\u00a0who have not been convicted of a\u00a0crime. The\u00a0new\u00a0law further\u00a0grants\u00a0authorities\u00a0dangerous discretion to\u00a0arrest, prosecute and sentence people for engaging in\u00a0conduct\u00a0that\u00a0is\u00a0protected under international human rights law, including expression and\u00a0assembly,\u201d\u00a0said Mahmoud Shalaby, Regional Researcher at Amnesty International.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile the introduction of these\u00a0measures came\u00a0during a crisis,\u00a0amid Iranian\u00a0retaliatory\u00a0attacks on Kuwait,\u00a0under international law, states may\u00a0only\u00a0derogate from certain obligations\u00a0in extremely limited circumstances,\u00a0after formal notification,\u00a0and\u00a0certain\u00a0rights cannot be derogated from\u00a0under\u00a0any circumstances,\u00a0including\u00a0the right to life\u00a0and the\u00a0principle of legality.\u00a0Kuwaiti authorities must urgently amend the\u00a0new\u00a0law to ensure that counterterrorism measures\u00a0comply with\u00a0their international human rights obligations. They\u00a0should\u00a0also\u00a0immediately\u00a0establish\u00a0a moratorium on the use of the death penalty,\u201d said\u00a0Mahmoud Shalaby.<\/p>\n
Amnesty International\u00a0reviewed\u00a0Decree-Law No. 47 of 2026 on Combating Terrorism Crimes,\u00a0Law No. 106 of 2013 on Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism,\u00a0Decree-Law No. 51 of 2026 on Designating Criminal Circuits to Hear Cases Concerning Crimes against External and Internal State Security and Terrorist Crimes,\u00a0and\u00a0the\u00a0Kuwaiti Penal Code.\u00a0The organisation\u00a0also\u00a0spoke to\u00a0two\u00a0individuals\u00a0in relation to arrests under the new counterterrorism law, who requested anonymity given well-justified fears of reprisals, amid a\u00a0wider crackdown on freedom of expression\u00a0since\u00a0the US-Israeli unlawful attacks on Iran on 28 February 2026 and Iran\u2019s retaliatory attacks on Gulf\u00a0states.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Mandatory\u00a0death penalty\u00a0for \u2018terrorist\u2019 acts<\/strong>\u00a0<\/h2>\n
Under the new law, any\u00a0person\u00a0who has committed an offence under Kuwaiti law that is punishable by life imprisonment will\u00a0now\u00a0face the mandatory death penalty if the offence is\u00a0classified as a \u201cterrorist act.\u201d\u00a0This includes, for instance,\u00a0\u201cterrorist\u00a0acts\u201d\u00a0such as\u00a0spreading \u201cfalse information\u201d at a time of war where it undermines national security or public order and is committed as\u00a0\u201ca result of espionage with hostile states,\u201d\u00a0as well as\u00a0attacks on ships at sea\u00a0with the intent to seize\u00a0them or their cargo,\u00a0or\u00a0to harm\u00a0people on board.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
The\u00a0expansion of the scope of the death penalty, its mandatory imposition and use for offences that do not meet the threshold of \u201cmost serious crimes\u201d involving intentional killing violate Kuwait\u2019s obligations as a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Amnesty International opposes the death penalty unconditionally, in all cases and under any circumstances.\u00a0Kuwait continues\u00a0to\u00a0impose\u00a0the death penalty\u00a0for a range of offences, including\u00a0offences that do not meet the international law threshold of \u201cmost serious crimes\u201d.\u00a0In 2025, Kuwait issued a new law that\u00a0expanded the circumstances in which drug-related offences\u00a0are punishable by death.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Overly\u00a0broad\u00a0and vague\u00a0definition of \u201cterrorist\u2019\u00a0act<\/strong>\u00a0<\/h3>\n
Prior to the enactment of the 2026 law, Kuwait\u2019s\u00a0Law No. 106 of 2013 on Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism\u00a0defined\u00a0a \u201cterrorist act\u201d\u00a0as\u00a0acts or attempted acts\u00a0intended to cause death or serious bodily injury, as well as offences falling within the scope of nine\u00a0international legal instruments.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
The\u00a02026 counterterrorism\u00a0law provides\u00a0a definition\u00a0that is\u00a0significantly\u00a0broader\u00a0and vaguer, contrary to the principle of legal\u00a0certainty.\u00a0The law defines a\u00a0\u201cterrorist act\u201d\u00a0as any act or threat that \u201ccauses damage to national resources, private or public property, public facilities, land, sea, or air transportation, or cybersecurity \u2026 aimed at spreading terror among people, endangering the safety and security of society, or compelling a public authority or a regional or international organization to perform or refrain from performing any act.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
This definition\u00a0risks enabling\u00a0the\u00a0criminalization of\u00a0acts\u00a0protected under international human rights law.\u00a0These\u00a0could include participation in\u00a0peaceful protests\u00a0and\u00a0strikes disrupting transportation\u00a0or\u00a0engaging in\u00a0other forms of\u00a0peaceful\u00a0dissent,\u00a0some of which\u00a0may result in\u00a0\u201cdamage to public resources\u201d or\u00a0minor property damage.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
This low threshold,\u00a0which does not require\u00a0serious violence against persons,\u00a0taken\u00a0with the\u00a0inclusion of acts aimed at \u201ccompelling a public authority\u2026\u00a0to perform or refrain from performing any act\u201d,\u00a0risks\u00a0criminalizing advocacy campaigns and\u00a0peaceful\u00a0protests intended to influence government policy or decision-making.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism has\u00a0stated<\/a>\u00a0that definitions\u00a0of terrorism\u00a0should not\u00a0extend beyond acts causing death,\u00a0serious injury\u00a0or threats to life.\u00a0The UN expert\u00a0has also cautioned that where\u00a0definitions of terrorism\u00a0do,\u00a0they should expressly exclude advocacy, protest,\u00a0dissent\u00a0and\u00a0industrial action\u00a0(collective labour action)\u00a0that\u00a0do not result in death or\u00a0serious injury.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Punishment without criminal conviction<\/strong>\u00a0<\/h4>\n
Under the new law,\u00a0people\u00a0can be\u00a0considered\u00a0as presenting\u00a0a\u00a0\u201cterrorism danger\u201d\u00a0if their\u00a0conduct\u00a0\u201cposes a serious threat of committing a terrorist act\u201d,\u00a0by\u00a0\u201cdisseminating, endorsing, or glorifying ideas that incite the commission of terrorist acts\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0Terms\u00a0such as \u201cendorsing\u201d and \u201cglorifying\u201d are not defined in the law and are inherently vague, creating a significant risk that they will be used to criminalize\u00a0peaceful\u00a0dissent.\u00a0<\/p>\n
People\u00a0can\u00a0also\u00a0be\u00a0deemed\u00a0as\u00a0posing a \u201cterrorism danger\u201d\u00a0if they\u00a0have habitual association with individuals or organizations involved in inciting,\u00a0facilitating, or committing terrorist acts.\u00a0The\u00a0law\u00a0does not specify which authority has the power to make\u00a0the \u201cterrorism danger\u201d\u00a0determination. This raises concerns\u00a0regarding\u00a0due process and creates a risk of arbitrariness.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Under the law,\u00a0people\u00a0considered\u00a0to\u00a0pose\u00a0a\u00a0\u201cterrorism danger\u201d\u00a0may be\u00a0instructed\u00a0by the Public Prosecution\u00a0to\u00a0take part\u00a0in a\u00a0rehabilitation programme\u00a0at a government-run centre, which,\u00a0according to the\u00a0law,\u00a0includes \u201crehabilitative activities\u00a0covering cognitive, psychological, social, behavioural, health, vocational, and religious aspects.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
If these people do not\u00a0comply\u00a0with\u00a0the instruction\u00a0without an\u00a0\u201cacceptable\u00a0excuse\u201d,\u00a0the Public Prosecution\u00a0must\u00a0request\u00a0a\u00a0court\u00a0order compelling\u00a0the\u00a0person\u00a0to\u00a0participate.\u00a0The\u00a0court can\u00a0then\u00a0order the person\u00a0take part in the\u00a0rehabilitation programme, as well as\u00a0impose\u00a0additional\u00a0restrictions, including police\u00a0monitoring,\u00a0bans on entering specified places,\u00a0and prohibitions on contacting specified persons or entities.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Even though the law\u00a0stipulates\u00a0that\u00a0a person who does not comply with the Public Prosecutor\u2019s instruction\u00a0must be heard\u00a0by a court before\u00a0being\u00a0compelled\u00a0to join a rehabilitation programme,\u00a0and that\u00a0these\u00a0decisions are subject to appeal, the imposition of such restrictive measures in the absence of a criminal conviction violates the right to the presumption of innocence and undermines due process guarantees.\u00a0The measures themselves also interfere with the rights to freedom of movement,\u00a0association,\u00a0privacy\u00a0and family life, and may adversely affect other rights, including the right to work.\u00a0<\/p>\n
There is no publicly available information on how many\u00a0people\u00a0have been affected by these measures.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Establishment of\u00a0a\u00a0new\u00a0terrorism\u00a0prosecution\u00a0branch\u00a0and designated courts\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0<\/h5>\n
Two weeks after the adoption of the new\u00a0law, Kuwaiti authorities created\u00a0a\u00a0new\u00a0prosecution branch and\u00a0designated\u00a0courts\u00a0with sole\u00a0jurisdiction\u00a0over terrorism cases.\u00a0In proceedings before these bodies, authorities\u00a0have\u00a0already\u00a0violated\u00a0fair trial guarantees.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n