In the age of social media, defamation, insult and public shaming have become among the most common offences in Kuwait. Understanding the line between free expression and criminal liability is essential for every citizen and resident.
Initial warning: a single tweet or a WhatsApp group message can lead to imprisonment and a fine — not every opinion is lawful, even if it is true.
Contents
1) Distinguishing Defamation, Insult and Public Shaming
Defamation (qadhf)
Attributing a specific fact to a person which, if true, would subject them to punishment or public contempt. The key: a verifiable factual allegation.
Insult (sabb)
Any expression that impugns honour or reputation without attributing a specific fact. The key: general abusive language without a factual allegation.
Public shaming: not a standalone offence in the classic Penal Code, but it is punished as an aggravated form of defamation when carried out publicly — especially online, where the Cybercrime Law applies. See cybercrime.
2) Elements of the Offence
- Actus reus (defamation): attributing a specific fact publicly or in the presence of a person other than the victim.
- Actus reus (insult): directing abusive language in a manner accessible to others.
- Publicity: the expression must reach an indeterminate number of persons — satisfied by publication, broadcast or sending to a group.
- Mens rea: the intention to make the attribution or insult with knowledge of the nature of the words — intent to harm is not required.
Important: it suffices that a WhatsApp message was sent to a group containing even one person other than the victim for the publicity element to be satisfied.
3) Penalties
- Defamation: imprisonment not exceeding two years and/or a fine.
- Insult: imprisonment not exceeding one year and/or a fine.
- Defamation or insult by publication: aggravated penalty.
- Defamation of a public official: a special aggravated penalty in certain circumstances.
Aggravating circumstance: where defamation or insult is committed via information technology, the Cybercrime Law applies with harsher penalties — see cybercrime offences.
5) Available Defences
Substantive defences
- Absence of publicity: the conversation was private between two persons only.
- Right of criticism: objective criticism of a public act without impugning personal honour.
- Good faith: defamation of a public official concerning their duties, where the defamer proves the truth of the allegation.
- Reporting judicial proceedings: publication in good faith.
Procedural defences
- Limitation: expiry of the complaint period.
- Failure to file a complaint: defamation and insult may only be prosecuted on the victim's complaint.
- Withdrawal: the victim's withdrawal of the complaint extinguishes the prosecution.
Limits of lawful criticism: even permissible criticism must be objective, not personal. Commenting on an official's decision is lawful; describing them in abusive terms is not.
6) Complaint Procedure
- Document the evidence: screenshots with date, URL and the publisher's account.
- File a complaint with the Cybercrime Investigation Unit (if online) or a police station.
- Prosecution investigation: the accused is summoned and digital evidence examined.
- Referral to court: usually the Misdemeanour Court.
Complaint deadline: defamation and insult may only be prosecuted on the victim's complaint. The victim may withdraw the complaint, which terminates the criminal proceedings.
7) Civil Claims
In addition to the criminal track, the victim may claim compensation:
- Moral damages: harm to reputation and feelings of humiliation.
- Material damages: where the shaming caused actual financial loss (loss of clients, for example).
- The civil claim may be joined to the criminal case or brought as an independent civil action.
Rule: an acquittal in the criminal case does not necessarily preclude a civil award — the accused may be acquitted criminally yet held liable for civil fault. See compensation and civil claims.
8) Preventive Guidance
To avoid committing the offence
- Distinguish objective criticism from personal attack.
- Do not reshare what others said — the publisher is liable like the author.
- Avoid naming individuals in the context of accusations.
- Consult a lawyer before publishing if in doubt.
If you are a victim
- Document the post immediately with screenshots.
- Do not respond in kind — a retaliatory response may constitute a separate offence.
- File a complaint with the Cybercrime Unit.
- Consult a lawyer to claim compensation.
Golden rule: if you are about to write something about a person, ask yourself: could I say this in front of a judge? If you hesitate — do not publish.
Have you been defamed or publicly shamed and want to hold the offender accountable? Or are you facing an accusation and need a defence? Contact Attorney Meshari Obaid Al-Enezi — Yumnaak Law Firm.
4) Social-Media Shaming
Most cases today originate from social media: