In a pivotal decision, Kuwait’s Criminal Court has issued a stern reminder to law enforcement, clarifying that the absence of a driver’s license is not sufficient grounds for arrest or search. The court highlighted the importance of adhering to legal protocols and ruled that officers must secure authorization from Public Prosecution before initiating searches without clear evidence of criminal behavior.
The case revolved around a man stopped at a security checkpoint, where the officer, citing strange behavior, requested identification. Upon discovering the man lacked a driver’s license, the officer searched him and ordered him into the patrol car, uncovering what was later claimed to be narcotics. However, the court ruled that this sequence of events violated the legal procedures governing arrests and searches.
While driving without a license is a misdemeanor punishable by up to three months in jail under Traffic Law No. 3/1982, it does not permit arbitrary searches or detention. The court emphasized that such actions are only justified under exceptional circumstances, none of which were present in this case. Notably, the officer failed to establish that the defendant was evading the checkpoint, providing false information, or engaging in behavior indicative of immediate criminal activity.
The court also dismissed the officer’s claim of “abnormal behavior” as insufficient grounds to suspect narcotics possession. Observing unusual conduct alone does not meet the legal threshold for arrest or search without a warrant. Additionally, the officer did not present evidence suggesting familiarity with the defendant or any prior suspicion that would warrant bypassing the standard legal process.
The court ruled that the arrest, search, and subsequent steps—including a referral for a drug test—were conducted unlawfully. It noted that the defendant never admitted to consuming narcotics or possessing them for trade, further undermining the officer’s actions.
With these procedural violations in mind, the court acquitted the defendant, declaring the evidence invalid. The defendant’s legal representative, Abdul Mohsen Al-Qattan, successfully argued that the officer’s actions lacked legal justification and the alleged crimes were neither substantiated nor plausible.
This ruling reinforces the boundaries of police authority, underscoring that even minor offenses like driving without a license do not give officers carte blanche to bypass legal protections.
