Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 124

Summary: - The administrative authority’s delay in reporting the incident and the existence of litigation between it and the appellant do not preclude reliance on its employees’ statements. Rule: It is established that weighing witnesses’ statements and judicial reliance upon them, whatever criticisms are directed at them and whatever doubts surround them, are matters for the trial court, which accords them the standing it considers appropriate and assesses them as it finds satisfactory, without review. When it accepts their testimony, this means that it has rejected all the considerations advanced by the defence to persuade it not to rely upon it. The administrative authority’s delay in reporting the incident and the existence of litigation between it and the appellant likewise do not preclude reliance on its employees’ statements. It is also established that motive is not a constituent element or component of the crime and is immaterial to the existence of criminal intent therein. Since the court was satisfied with the statements of the prosecution witnesses, what the appellant raises concerning the absence from the papers of evidence that he committed the incident, the victim entity’s delay in reporting it, the existence of previous disputes between them, and his lack of motive to commit it amounts to factual argument concerning assessment of the evidence and the trial court’s authority to weigh the elements of the case and derive its conviction. These are matters on which it may not be challenged, nor may its conviction be overridden before the Court of Cassation.