Citizens for Bahrain review of the activity of the 2014 Parliament
Jan – July 2015
A high proportion of legislative time during the first half of 2015 was taken up debating a small number of specific issues. Namely the 2015-18 Government Action Plan; the 2015-16 State Budget; the Financial Audit Bureau annual report, as well as issues of subsidy reform and the public debt ceiling. However, MPs were keen to raise issues like housing, welfare benefits, public services and infrastructure projects.
With this being the first new Parliament since the 2012 constitutional amendments which gave new powers to MPs, this has been an important period for testing the extent of these powers. For example; forcing changes to the Action Plan and Budget; demanding action on corruption and revising procedures for interrogating ministers and holding the Government to account.
However, the high ambitions of many new MPs have been radically curtailed by the difficulteconomic situation, mainly due to the fall in oil revenues which constitute the majority of Government income. As a result, the Budget approval process revolved around efforts to ensure that previously-promised public benefits and services weren’t cut and difficult decisions about what projects and spending plans were unnecessary.
Below, we look month by month at many of the major issues which have passed through Parliament over this period:
January 2015
Government Action Plan
Four weeks of parliamentary time during January was centred on debate about the 2015-2018 Government Action Plan. The power of MPs to reject the Government’s Action Plan is a new measure from in the 2012 parliamentary amendments. So this is the first time MPs have had the chance to exercise this right.
MPs held a series of extensive meetings with ministers to draw out more detail about the Action Plan and to discuss the addition of a substantial number of proposals made by MPs. The final document was greatly influenced by these debates, with MPs succeeding in the inclusion of a number of measures for providing support to constituents.
Study of the Action Plan was overseen by a specially-formed committee headed by Deputy Parliament Chairman Ali al-Aradi. The Final redrafted plan received support from a majority of MPs in early February, although there were some critics who believed that the proposals weren’t ambitious enough and who criticized the lack of detail about timescales for implementation and costs.
Shura Council rejects preferential treatment for Bahraini workers
The Shura Council rejected a controversial proposed bill for enforcing preferential treatment for hiring and firing Bahraini workers. The proposed measure would force an employer to choose a Bahraini over a non-Bahraini worker “with comparable skills”; while ensuring that if workers had to be made redundant, non-Bahrainis would be the first to lose their jobs.
Shura committee members who recommended the rejection of the bill agreed with the Government recommendation that such measures “infringed the rights of Bahraini employers” in hiring those most suitable for the job, while contravening international law prohibiting discrimination on grounds of race. Shura members added that the proposals were unenforceable in court because: “How can competencies be measured? Expertise and abilities cannot be measured in numbers”.
Bills postponed from previous Parliament
On 20 January, MPs took a vote on all the 39 bills that had been postponed by the previous Parliament. They rejected 14 proposals, including several bills concerned with additional penal laws and restrictions on rallies and public demonstrations.
MPs agreed to continue work on the remaining 25 bills, including a key piece of legislation for guaranteeing financial support to those of limited incomes. MPs voted to continue working on the setting up of an institution for fighting corruption.
February 2015
Unpaid leave for officials under investigation
In February MPs agreed that civil servants being investigated on criminal charges were to be forced to go on unpaid leave. Some deputies questioned whether this went against the principle of innocent until proven guilty. However, it was agreed that if found innocent, these officials would be entitled to their back-pay.
Disruption of weekly session
During the Tuesday 10 February parliamentary session, a handful of MPs tried to force the Parliament Chairman, Ahmed al-Mulla to discuss allegations in the press concerning the Parliament’s General Secretariat. Al-Mulla refused to allow the issue to be discussed, saying that the matter would be addressed in due course and that it was unfair for Parliament to be diverted away from issues which benefitted the public. These MPs, many of whom were on the Islamist fringe, continued to shout their objections, with the aim of disrupting the session and eventually staged a walkout.
Several MPs were later strongly critical of the deputies who had walked out. MP Abbas al-Madhi said in a statement that these figures had acted “according to narrow and non-nationalistic affiliations”. It later transpired that the allegations concerned an official who was a member of the Salafist Al-Asalah Society. The individual left his post in the General Secretariat.
Pay cuts threatened for non-attending MPs
Parliament Chairman Ahmed al-Mulla condemned MPs who failed to regularly attend parliamentary sessions. This became a major issue during the previous Parliament when it was discovered that some MPs had been stuffing papers into the machine recording attendance, allowing them to falsely claim that they were attending sessions.
“MPs are here to serve the people and it is their responsibility to show up if they are concerned about the welfare of those who have elected them,” Al-Mulla said, warning that there would be pay deductions for those who failed to attend without valid excuses.
Health fees standoff
MPs spoke out against the health fees imposed on expat workers in a parliamentary sessionattended by Health Minister Sadiq al-Shehabi. Several MPs said the fees unfairly penalized Bahraini businesses which would have to bear the burden of these fees. They claimed that the fees made it unprofitable for businesses to take on staff and crowded out investment.
The Minister responded that the measure did not amount to an additional tax on businesses, but was about paying a fee for services provided by the Ministry of Health. Ministers have pointed out the considerable expenses of the previous arrangement in which non-Bahrainis were eligible for free healthcare, particularly in the current context of huge pressures on the budget.
Clash over recruitment bill
February saw a confrontation the elected Council of Representatives and the appointed Shura Council over proposed measures which would force employers to prefer a Bahraini candidate over an equally qualified non-Bahraini worker, both for recruitment and when staff have to be laid off.
The Shura Council – supported by the Cabinet and Chamber of Commerce – rejected the CoR’s proposals, saying they were unenforceable in court; contradicted international laws on non-discriminatory employment rights; and infringed the rights of employers to freely choose their staff.
However, during the 24 February parliamentary session, MPs one after the other spoke in rejection of the Shura Council’s decision. Deputies pointed out that, in practice, non-Bahrainis were being recruited at a faster rate than Bahrainis, so the authorities had a responsibility to redress the balance. As MP Mohammed al-Ammadi pointed out: “All states around the world give preference to their own citizens, so why should Bahrain be any different?”
March 2015
Parliamentary attack on free visas
MPs called for action over the phenomenon of unregistered foreign labourers working under the so-called free visa system. MPs like Adel Hamid have stressed the economic and security risks of the increasing numbers of people staying in Bahrain illegally. According to official figures, the number may be as many as 60,000 foreign nationals. A majority of MPs voted to establish a committee to investigate the issue.
Public sector bonuses
During the 3 March parliamentary session, MP Jamal Dawoud stridently criticized the Finance Minister over the payment of over 3.4 million BD bonuses to Pension Fund Authority employees. Dawoud said that this was a “waste” at a time when the department was reporting a budget shortfall. “Bonuses are only appropriate for profitable companies that have large surpluses, not for an entity facing bankruptcy,” Dawoud stated. The Finance Minister responded that these payments were the “right” and could not be halted.
Regulating street vendors
A parliamentary debate on proposed amendments to the public health bill focused on the issue of street vendors. The proposed amendments provide for additional official scrutiny of food products on sale in Bahrain. However, currently products sold on the side of the street are not subject to the same levels of scrutiny.
Opinion differed between some MPs who argued that these vendors should be properly regulated and others who said that selling products on the side of the street should be banned altogether, alleging that many such vendors were non-registered non-Bahrainis. Parliament is to continue debating revisions to the Public Health bill over the coming week.
Penal Code reforms
The Shura Council approved comprehensive reforms to the Penal Code. The previous Penal Code extends back to 1976, although many modifications have been made since then. The current draft aims to bring the Code into line with the requirements of the present day. In most cases the new penalties are stiffer and cover punishments for murder, assault, armed crime and fraud.
A ceiling on public debt
A draft bill has been in circulation since the previous Parliament seeking to impose a ceiling on levels of public sector debt. Originally MPs had proposed limiting debt levels to 40% of GDP. However, a Shura Council amendment proposed an increase to 60%.
During the parliamentary debate on the subject, head of the Finance Committee, Isa al-Kooheji, said that Government debt levels stood at 5.6bn BD – 45.3% of GDP. Al-Kooheji warned that subsequent generations would have to cope with the implications of increasing levels of debt. Numerous other MPs also spoke, warning of the need to impose limits on debt levels.
However, MP Adel al-Asoumi called on his parliamentary colleagues to “pause” before passing a draft bill placing a ceiling on public debt. Al-Asoumi said that “limiting public debt could affect security, defence and standards of living. Don’t give the Finance Ministry the pretense for reducing projects”.
Quran inquiry
During a recent inter-school talent contest, there was widespread public outrage over a video distributed showing a contestant signing verses of the Quran to music – a practice widely considered to be un-Islamic. The Ministry of Education took measures against those involved. However, several parliamentarians called for a further inquiry into the circumstances of the incident.
This was the subject of a debate in Parliament on 17 March. Unexpectedly, a few prominent Islamic figures spoke out against further action. A majority of MPs voted in favour of a parliamentary investigation committee to examine the “educational” ramifications of the incidents.
Curtailing public debt
A majority of 30 MPs defied the Finance Minister during the 24 March weekly parliamentarysession and voted against raising the public debt ceiling to seven billion Bahraini dinars, setting the stage for a difficult tug of war between the Parliament and the Cabinet in approving the annual State Budget.
The parliamentary Finance Committee, headed by Isa al-Kooheji, had itself initially recommended that Parliament reject a rise in the debt ceiling. However, following an intervention by Finance Ministry officials, the Committee unsuccessfully called for the proposal to be sent back to the Finance Committee for further discussion. An overwhelming majority of MPs voted against an increase in the debt ceiling to 7bn BD.
MPs took turns to echo their fears that Bahrain was getting into “dangerous” levels of debt. During the session, the Finance Minister argued that by limiting public borrowing, this would limit spending on projects which would benefit the public.
Yemen intervention
Numerous MPs stood up in Parliament to denounce Iran’s interference in Yemen and praise the Saudi-led intervention. AbdulrahmanBu-Ali – one of the primary advocates of Parliament’s statement supporting the Arab intervention in Yemen – praised the “brave” GCC forces fighting in Yemen and “defending our nations… We say to the world: It is our right to defend our existence”. Jamal Dawoud noted the widespread support he had received from constituents for military action.
Mohsinal-Bakri said that Arab states had been in “the most shameful situation. They have now regained their confidence in their leadership”. Jamal Buhassan said the intervention had been too slow “because Iran wants to undermine security and cause divisions”.
April 2015
Implementation of deputies’ proposals
MPs agreed on a proposal for obligating the Government to strict timescales for implementing private members bills put forward by individual MPs and agreed on by Parliament and the Government. Many MPs stood up and criticized the Government for agreeing to certain proposals and then failing to implement them.
Shaikh Majid al-Majid said that his Legal Committee had studied 319 (out of 496) unimplemented proposals, some going back to 2004-07. Al-Majid said: The Government should announce that it won’t cooperate with the legislative branch, rather than just neglecting the Assembly”.
The Minister for Parliament challenged the proposal, saying that it infringed on the work of Government. Predictably, this drew an angry response from many MPs who pointed out that many of these proposals came directly from constituents and represented popular demands.
Protecting families against domestic violence
Parliament approved amendments to the penal code for a new Domestic Violence Protection Law. This included measures protecting children below the age of seven and the mentally-handicapped. Offenders could expect punishments of more than three months in prison or upwards of a 100 BD fine.
However, 21 MPs rejected a clause stipulating punishments for acts “leading to sexual abuse or harm” and criminalizing sexual abuse within marriage.
Shia cleric Shaikh Majid al-Asfour represented the outspoken voice of opposition to the sexual abuse clause, arguing that: “sex is an intimate issue between husband and wife, we can’t get into it. No-one has the right to question it, as sometimes it involves rough sex.”
The Women and Children Committee chairwoman Dr. Jamila al-Sammak strongly challenged these arguments, saying that sexual abuse in marriage should be punishable since both partners should consent. The Social Development Minister pledged to lobby the Shura Council to retain the domestic sexual abuse clause in the new law.
Sports and the youth in Bahrain
During an open parliamentary debate about the status of sports in Bahrain, many MPs criticized the lack of investment and official level interest. Isa al-Kooheji questioned why Bahrain had never succeeded in winning the Gulf Cup for football, noting the lack of any kind of planning or strategy for upgrading the status of sports in Bahrain.
Adel al-Asoumi was widely quoted in the press the next day claiming that Bahrain’s investment in sport was less than the value of “Ronaldo’s shorts”.
Financial Audit Bureau report
The 14 April parliamentary session was mainly devoted to the annual Financial Audit Bureau report. The Parliament’s Financial Committee headed by Isa al-Kooheji spent several weeks discussing this document and eventually recognized 51 violations across a number of government departments which appeared to be of a “criminal nature”.
There were also a number of cases where the Committee recommended interrogating ministers and setting up committees for conducting further investigations. At the end of the debate, a strong majority of 33 MPs voted in favour of the Finance Committees recommendations.
Over the past months MPs have been signaling a shift in attitude to the abuse of public funds. Deputies have stressed the need for harsh action to be taken, demonstrating a more severe position in comparison with previous parliaments, which were criticized by the public for failing to convincingly address allegations of corruption.
Parliament’s decision this week represents a strong signal of the determination of deputies to force government bodies to prevent the wastage of public funds and hold corrupt officials to account. To many MPs who made ambitious election campaign pledges about enforcing their monitoring role, their reputations stand on their determination to follow up on these issues and increase standards of good governance.
Mumtalakat
Following the findings of the Financial Audit Bureau report, several MPs, including Mohammed al-Ahmed, have been lobbying for increased action to monitor the financial dealings of the sovereign wealth fund, Mumtalakat. These MPs got their wish with agreement for the formation of a parliamentary committee to investigate this issue.
May 2015
Health Minister interrogation
A number of MPs had been agitating for several weeks to interrogate Health Minister Sadiq al-Shehabi following allegations raised in the Financial Audit Bureau report of mishandling of finances at the Health Ministry.
Around 30 MPs previously signed a bill calling for the Minister’s interrogation and a specially-formed committee recommended the interrogation. However, during the 5 Mayparliamentary session, MPs failed to achieve a two-thirds majority (27 votes out of 40) in support of the interrogation. Only 23 MPs voted in favour, three voted against (Rua al-Haiki, Ali al-Muqla and Anas Buhindi), while nine abstained and five did not attend the session.
Adel al-Asoumi accused other MPs of having failed to use their “constitutional tools”, asking “If you won’t interrogate the Health Minister, who will you interrogate?”
One of the main grievances cited by MPs was alleged abuses in the use of foreign agencies for sending Bahrainis for treatment abroad. However, a substantial proportion of these issues related to the tenure of the previous Health Minister, who was not eligible to be summoned. So there were different views over the justifications and constitutionality of summoning the current Health Minister to discuss such issues.
Budget submitted to Parliament
After weeks of delays, the 2015-2016 State Budget was formally transferred to Parliament. Head of the Financial Committee, Isa al-Kooheji stressed the need to “preserve the benefits of the public” in the Budget.
MPs had been critical of the delay in submitting the Budget, which according to the Constitution should have been put to Parliament two months before the end of the financial year.
However, a number of procedural matters had delayed this, including the need for MPs to first approve the 2015-18 Government Action Plan; and disagreements at how to balance the Budget given the decreased oil revenues and the reluctance of Parliament to see an increase in borrowing.
The expectation is that the Financial Committee headed by Isa al-Kooheji will spend two to three weeks studying the document. It has already asked various governments for further details showing how individual projects will be funded.
Urgent bills dispute
During the 28 April parliamentary session there was an extensive debate about the legitimacy of the Government marking bills as “urgent”, thus requiring MPs to debate and vote on the bill within 15 days to avoid it passing automatically.
In previous days the Government had submitted four urgent bills, which MPs complained was unprecedented. The Legal Committee headed by Majid al-Majid recommended that MPs reject these bills on principle. Al-Majid said that the bills had arrived late, and given their importance it was right for Parliament to have more time to review them.
However, a number of MPs pointed out that while they rejected the principle of such bills being marked as urgent, it was counter to the public interest for important proposals to be rejected. Deputy Chairman Ali al-Aradi pointed out the vital nature of the Dispute Resolution bill for ensuring Bahrain’s business-friendly environment and urged MPs not to reject it. The result was that after a lengthy debate a majority of MPs passed these “urgent” bills.
Debate over MPs’ benefits
In early May there was a heated debate in the media and social media about Shura Council proposals for revising the system of retirement benefits for parliamentarians and municipal councilors.
There was particular public anger about the prospect that MPs may vote to increase the ceiling for their own benefits to above 4,000 BD per month. The parliamentary Services Committee had initially recommended to approve the package in full, with Committee Chairman Abbas al-Madhi arguing that this would not affect the Budget, because only a relatively small number of people would be benefitting from the measures.
During the 12 May parliamentary session there was apparent unity among MPs in rejecting the possibility of increasing benefits above the 4,000 BD ceiling. However, most MPs defended changes to the regulations which would allow MPs who had served for a two year period following the traumatic 2011 by-election to receive benefits. MPs agreed to give the Legal Committee more time to study and prepare the proposals.
Protecting the fishing industry
During the 19 May open parliamentary debate on the fishing industry, Ibrahim al-Hammadisaid “We have discussed this issue for four years without seeing any result… the saying that ‘the eye sees, but the hand is small’ is applicable to the administration of our fishing resources, because its capabilities are weak”. Al-Hammadi called for a new law regulating the fishing industry, particularly with regard to the issuing of permits. He cited numerous violations and abuses of the system.
Bahrainiization controversy
During the weekly parliamentary session, a proposed bill for making the public sector fully Bahraini within five years had to be withdrawn by Legal Committee Chairman Majid al-Majidfor further discussion, after many objections from MPs.
Al-Majid tried to reassure his colleagues, saying that the proposal set out a general vision and didn’t seek to target specific roles. He added that the expenditure for implementing the law “would not be extortionate”.
There was a broad range of views expressed among MPs, between those who were ready to see drastic action taken to make the public sector entirely Bahraini; and those who saw a need for foreign specialists.
Meat subsidies outcry
The big political story in Bahrain during late May was the Government plan to cancelsubsidies on meat and replace these with cash handouts to Bahraini citizens.
This news was received badly by most MPs, firstly because they hadn’t been informed in advance of this proposal; and secondly because the cash handouts – according to media reports – would add up to relatively small amounts of money.
During the 26 May weekly session MPs voted to delay a debate on this issue until the following week, so that ministers would be present – then they went ahead and spent most of the session discussing meat subsidies anyway!
All MPs who spoke declared themselves opposed to the proposals. Many MPs conceded that there was a need to restructure the system of subsidies, to make it more affordable, and to ensure that these were targeted at Bahraini citizens.
June 2015
Budget approval process
According to the Constitution, the Budget should have been submitted to Parliament well before the end of the financial year. However, due to the timing of the November 2014 elections and the need for MPs to first approve the 2015-18 Government action Plan (debated throughout January and February), the Budget was initially delayed.
Further delays have been due to the difficulty of drafting the Budget in the context of sharp decreases in oil revenues which constitute the largest share of Government income. From an early stage MPs also sought reassurances that the final Budget would not compromise on promises concerning benefits and services for the public as agreed in the Action Plan.
The Budget was submitted to MPs during the first half of May and the Financial Committees of both houses of Parliament both formed a joint Committee to study to huge amount of documentation provided. Following consultation with other MPs, extensive revisions and additions were proposed by this Joint Committee. Some of these proposals were related to securing welfare payments and other benefits; while a range of proposals were also put forward for slashing public spending in other areas. In particular, several major projects judged to be non-essential were recommended for shelving.
MPs also put forward a number of proposals for boosting Government income and increasing the revenues flowing into the Budget. For example, it was agreed that income and profits from the Housing Bank would be included in the Budget. Although the Government by no means agreed to all the proposals submitted, a series of significant amendments were made, leading to the two Financial Committees recommending to both houses of Parliament that they vote to approve the final Budget draft.
On 2 July, the elected Council of Representatives held a special session. The broad consensus was that although the Budget did not go far enough on welfare support to certain segments of society (benefits to the elderly and other segments of society with special needs was a central issue of concern), given the difficult economic circumstances, the Budget was the best that could be arrived at. A majority of 22 MPs voted in favour, while 12 voted against and two abstained (four were absent). It is notable that almost all the MPs considered to be in the Sunni Islamist segment of the Parliament voted against the Budget. On 5 July a majority of Shura Council members also approved the proposals.
Debt ceiling
The issue of public borrowing has been an issue of major controversy associated with the Budget, so it is perhaps appropriate that during the same 2 July session a vote was held in which 18 MPs voted in favour of increasing the debt ceiling to BD 7bn, while seven MPs voted against.
This is particularly remarkable, because as recently as 24 March a large majority of 30 MPs rejected a similar measure, arguing strongly that there should be no additional borrowing. This 180 degree swing in parliamentary thinking came as a result of the gradual realization of the impossibility of compiling an acceptable Budget without resorting to borrowing.
At the end of the day, most MPs were willing to compromise on borrowing because they were not willing to compromise on welfare support and benefits to the general public. However, a small number of MPs, like Mohammed al-Ahmed and Mohammed al-Jowderremained resolutely opposed to increases in borrowing throughout this whole process. One MP, Ahmed Qaratah, went as far as submitting his own “zero deficit” Budget to the Finance Minister!