Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 35

Summary: - If the accused confesses to committing the offence at any time, the investigator must record this in the investigation record immediately upon its being made and question him about it in detail. Article 98 of the Criminal Procedure and Trials Law. - The accused may request postponement of interrogation until his lawyer attends. His failure to request this. A challenge alleging invalidity of the interrogation is manifestly invalid and requires no response from the challenged judgment. Rule: Whereas Article 98 of the Criminal Procedure and Trials Law requires the investigator, if the accused confesses to committing the offence at any time, to record his confession in the investigation record immediately upon its being made and question him about it in detail, and permits the accused to request postponement of interrogation until his lawyer attends. The documents establish that the accused confessed during the Public Prosecution’s investigations on 12/1/1993 after the investigator orally asked him about the matters attributed to him, without refusing to speak or requesting postponement of interrogation until his lawyer attended or to any other time. The investigator was therefore entitled to interrogate him without summoning his lawyer, pursuant to the express wording of the aforementioned Article. Consequently, the appellant’s allegation of invalidity of his interrogation in the Public Prosecution’s investigation has no basis in law. No fault attaches to the challenged judgment for not responding to his plea of invalidity of his interrogation on these grounds, because it is manifestly invalid.