Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 161

Summary: - Imposition of the penalty of dismissal from public office. Its condition: the person sentenced to dismissal must have committed the offence while holding office; his remaining in office until judgment is delivered, or the termination or expiry of his service, has no effect. - The benefit of the dismissal penalty is to prevent the employee from being re-employed for the period determined by the judgment, whether dismissal is temporary or absolute. - The challenged judgment’s dismissal of the appellant for committing the offence of appropriation of public funds while holding public office. Correct, even if he did not remain in office until the challenged judgment was delivered, whatever the reason for his not remaining. Rule: It is established that the criterion for imposing the penalty of dismissal, in cases where this is legally permissible, is that the person sentenced to dismissal committed the offence while holding office. His remaining in office until judgment is delivered, or the termination or expiry of his service, has no effect. The benefit of imposing this penalty in the latter case is to prevent his re-employment for the period determined by the judgment—whether dismissal is temporary or absolute. Accordingly, the judgment’s dismissal of the appellant from his office for committing the offence of appropriation of public funds while holding public office is correct in law, even if he did not remain in office until the challenged judgment was delivered, whatever the reason for his not remaining. His challenge to the judgment in this regard is therefore unsound.