S TAT E L E S S B Y D E C R E E S TAT E L E S S B Y D E C R E E Domestic Legal Framework Kuwait ʼs 1962 Constitution, with a 1992 amendment, sets out general commitments to a separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers and vague asser tions of generalised enfranchisement and empowerment of people and pillars of society. However, the Amir ʼs unchecked power is present in each of these spheres. 34 The GoKʼs narrow and restrictive approach to citizenship derives from the constitutional equivocation of Ar ticle 27, which states that citizenship “shall be determined by law”. This suggests a principle of legality, requiring that any action to def ine, grant, or revoke nationality would be based on clear legal provisions. In practice, its implementation is opaque and subject to the whims of the Amir. In Par t IV of the Constitution, entitled The Power, Ar ticle 51 states that the Amir possesses legislative power, Ar ticle 52 states that executive power is “vested in the Amir” while judicial power is vested in the cour ts, “in the Amirʼs name”, and Ar ticle 54 def ines the Amir as Head of State, who is “safeguarded and inviolable”. These provisions provide the context for Amir's May 2024 suspension of the National Assembly, whose powers, set out from Ar ticles 79 to 122 of the Constitution, are depicted as secondary to that of the Amir. In respect to those stripped of their citizenship, the Constitution promises judiciability in respect to decisions, whether by private or state actors: Ar ticle 166 states that “ The right to litigation is guaranteed to all. The Law shall determine the procedure and the conditions necessary for the exercise of that right.” Despite the asser tion in Ar ticle 166 that access to or eligibility for Kuwaiti nationality is not generally addressed in the cour ts, Kuwait imposes strict legal limitations on judicial jurisdiction over nationality and citizenship matters, effectively shielding these decisions from legal review. The Cour t of Cassation, Kuwait ʼs highest judicial authority, ruled on 17 April 2022 that citizenship and nationality issues are “acts of sovereignty” and therefore do not fall under judicial oversight. Cour ts have no jurisdiction to hear challenges to citizenship decisions. The Cour t of Cassation repor tedly grounded this in Ar ticle 2 of Amiri Decree 23/1990, on the Organisation of the Judiciary. Fur ther, as recorded in 1995, the GoK “ has stated the view that conferring citizenship is a sovereign right that is not subject to international scrutiny. It cites international instruments such as the Hague Conventions of 1930 as granting states full discretion in determining who should be their nationals.” 35 On 18 October 2012, then Prime Minister Jaber Al-Mubarak Al-Hamad al-Sabah told a member of the team preparing this repor t that disputes relating to the granting of nationality is a sovereign matter and not subject to cour t challenge. 36 Similarly, a 2013 ruling in an asylum case in the UK noted, too, that “After independence the Kuwaiti government formed a committee to register and review claims for nationality, but this body was dismantled in 1969. Thereafter, claims relating to itizenship remained matters of administrative determination. There is no right of appeal to the courts.” 37 OVERVIEW 1120