أكد وزير خارجية أميركا جون كيري الذي يقوم بجولة في الضفة الغربية وإسرائيل أنه اتفق مع مسؤولي الطرفين على خطة لتنمية الضفة سيعلنها لاحقا، في حين أكد مسؤولون فلسطينيون أن كيري لم يقدم أفكارا جديدة لإحياء عملية السلام المتوقفة منذ 2010.
ضرب زلزال تراوحت شدته بين 6.1 و6.3 درجة على مقياس ريختر مناطق واسعة في جنوب غربي إيران، شعر به سكان عدد من الدول الخليجية، حيث أفاد مكتبا CNN في إمارتي دبي وأبوظبي، بدولة الإمارات العربية المتحدة، بالشعور بالهزة الأرضية بعد ظهر الثلاثاء.
عرض مجموعة توب اكسبو : معرض العقار والإستثمار – معرض المعارض العقارية في الكويت – #kuwait #yabila
أرجأ مسؤول تركي زيارة كان يفترض أن تجريها لجنة إسرائيلية إلى أنقرة للتفاوض بشأن التعويضات المترتبة لأقارب تسعة ناشطين أتراك قتلوا في عملية للجيش الإسرائيلي مقابل سواحل غزة عام 2010.
|Major Place:||153 km SW of Shiraz, Iran|
TEL AVIV — Secretary of State John F. Kerry and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed progress Tuesday in preparing for possible new peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, opening a new chapter in U.S. peacemaking after what Kerry acknowledged is a long history of disappointments.
Did anyone feel the earthquake a few moments ago? (around 3pm)
Update: Confirmed, an earthquake hit Southern Iran awhile ago with a magnitude of 6.2 [Source]
Hey Fajer, I work for a private company in Kuwait and the company has my passport (and other employees) and refuses to keep it with us because they’re afraid we might leave the country. Do they have a right to keep our passports? I was told they don’t but I’m afraid if I make a big issue out of this then I might get fired.
So this question/answer is only for private company employees
Do employers have the right to keep an employees passport?
No, No and NOOOOO!
This is a very common question, at work and now from my readers on the blog.
Why is it illegal?
The Ministry resolution number 143/A/2010 says in (Article 1) “It is prohibited for private sector employers and oil sector employers to hold traveling documents of their employees”
Then (Article 2) mentions a punishment from the labor law for employers in the private sector who do not follow (Article 1). The punishment mentioned in (Article 141) from the labor law is as follows:
“In the event where the violator does not remedy the violation within the specified period, he shall be subject to a fine of not less than KD100 and not more than KD200 for each of the workers who are involved in the violation. In the event of recurrence within three years from the date of the final judgment, the punishment shall be doubled.” This means that your employer will get fined KD100-200 for keeping your passport.
Can you get fired?
No, No and NOOOOO!
You can not get fired except for reasons stated in the law which I won’t get into now but basically non of them is for telling your boss to be legal.
I want everyone to know the following for any labor law violations by your employers in the future:
– There is a hotline you can call (no one picked up when I called) 128
– There is a site where you can file a complaint (no one replied to me yet) http://www.mosal.gov.kw/
– There is also an NGO organized by Bibi Nasser called Social Work Society of Kuwait located in mishref www.q8sws.com Tel: 25375031 they might be able to help you with issues, even though most of their work is for domestic and construction workers
– According to the labor law, if you have a complaint against your employer, the Minstry of Labor and Social affairs will look into it before it gets to court and will try to resolve it
– If it does go to court, the court has exempted laborers from any court fees
– I sat with officials 2 weeks ago from the Minstry of Labor and Social Affairs for a research paper by John Hopkins about domestic workers in Kuwait and their rights. The officials I met with told me that an employee who’s passport is held by their employer can come in if he or she really needs to travel and get a paper from them that will allow the employee to travel
Fajer Ahmed – Legal Counsel
Have a Kuwait law related question? Email me at email@example.com
The legal opinions expressed in this post are those of the author Fajer. Opinions expressed by Mark or any other writer on 248am.com are those of the individual’s and in no way reflect Fajer’s opinion.
The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI), denounces today the sentencing “Saad Mohamed Ibrahim” for six months by Alexandria Military Court. The sentence came after illegal arrest procedures, investigations and trial, in which the military troops were the judge, jury and the executioner. This sentence falls in the series of the wasting the constitutional right of every citizen to be tried before his/her normal judge.
On Monday April, 8, Alexandria Military Court sentenced “Ibrahim” for six months imprisonment after it found him convicted of swearing at the military troops, presence in a military area without permits and possessing a cold steal weapons. He was sentenced, however, all the pleads of the lawyers which proved that what is stipulated in the investigations related to the the place and the time of arrest weren’t correct in addition to the non-logical testimony of the military arrest-officer and the lack of evidences that prove that the defendant possessed a cold steel among the evidences of the case.
While some Navy Personnels allegedly that they arrested him in an area affiliated to the Navy troops which is “Abou Qair armlet” in the night of February 18, 2013, while eye witnesses asserted and witnesses from the people of the area, asserted on that he was caught in the “Al-Abd beach” near by the armlet and it is an area affiliated to the borders guardians. The defendant also carry a valid permit to be presence in this area to perform his job. He was arrested in February 13, 2013, days before lodging the report! The families of the area asserted that the fact of kidnapping Saad and arresting him by the Navy was in the frame of assaulting the persons who are affiliated to the troops against some of the civilians in the beach of “Al-Abd”, in a campaign aims to discipline the people after they protested to demand the Navy to do its job and rescue the sailors of a fishing boat that was sunk near the coast before a while.
ANHRI said that the facts of the case is a model that exposes what implies the military prosecutions for civilians which include total waste of their rights. Most of times, the military personnels are in a state of confrontation with some of civilians, who might be the assailant part; the rival and they also play the role of the arrest-officer so they arrest whoever they want from the civilians. Then the military troops, represented in the military police, lodge the report of arrest and initial investigations. After that the military forces, through the military prosecution, investigate the fact and play the role of the prosecutor. Finally, the military forces, itself, play the role of the judge through the military court in an absurd series that lack of any logic and lack the simple definitions of justice; even if it was provided in form”.
ANHRI added “the persistent of the military trials to the civilians along with destroying the constitutional principle that every citizen has the right be tried only before his natural judge, it entrenchs the establishing of a state within and above the state. It is a state that combine all its multiple authorities for one body in which there is no independence for who play the role of the investigation, prosecution or the judiciary, they are all organizing in the frame of one leadership and represent one body; their official role make it inevitable on them to consider its interests before any other entity or body”.
ANHRI holds the president “Morsi” responsible, in his capacity, as the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, for the persistence of using the military trial for civilians as tool of repression and waste the rights. ANHRI demands him to intervene in this case and its similarities, as he has the power to ensure justice. ANHRI demands from the Shoura council, which is assigned to draft the legislations in absence of the House of the Representatives, to amend the judicial authority law to be in line with the spirit of the Egyptian constitution through the records of the discussions of the Constituent Assembly, which disappointingly failed to fully prohibit appearing of the civilians before the military courts. But these discussions set a guiding frame to the crimes and facts that allow of sending the civilians to the military courts, which for sure do not broaden to include facts like “Saad Mohamed Ibrahim” fact.
Also available in : العربية