Kuwait court upholds ‘Pension Cuts’ for former judges

The court in Kuwait has upheld a government decision to reduce the exceptional pensions of 10 former judges, ruling that the move was lawful and within the cabinet’s authority.

The Third Administrative Circuit of the Court of Cassation in Kuwait City accepted the appeal in form but rejected it on its merits in a case brought by the former judges against Cabinet Decision No. 294/2025.

The appellants had sought to annul the decision, which reduced their exceptional pensions from 1 May 2025, and requested temporary compensation of 10,000 Kuwaiti dinars each.

They argued that the decision had been issued by an unauthorised body, lacked legal basis and justification, and amounted to an abuse of power. They said they were notified of the pension reductions through the government’s Sahel application.

The court rejected procedural objections raised by the government and confirmed that the Judges’ Requests Circuit had jurisdiction to hear the case, as the matter related to pensions connected to their judicial roles. It said this fell within the scope of “judges’ professional affairs” under Article 50 of the Judicial Organization Law.

In its ruling, the court outlined constitutional and administrative principles, stating that the rule of law, equality and social justice require administrative decisions to be subject to legal oversight.

However, it also affirmed that the administrative authority has discretionary power to manage public funds and adjust spending priorities in line with economic developments.

The court said Article 80 of the Social Security Law grants the cabinet the authority to award exceptional pensions, creating a legal status. As a result, it ruled, the cabinet also has the power to review and amend the value of such pensions in the public interest and to preserve financial balance.

The court found the cabinet’s stated reasons, including reviewing areas of waste in the state budget, rationalising spending and ensuring fairness among those covered by the social security system to be sufficient and legally valid.

The court concluded that the decision had been issued by the competent authority and was based on factual and legal grounds, and that adjusting the pensions did not constitute a violation of acquired rights.