Democracy as harassment: The success of interpellations in the Kuwaiti Parliament and how to get past the "crisis" rhetoric

Kuwait is a unique example of a quasi-democratic system where the legislative branch exerts significant influence over the executive such that ministers are frequently replaced directly or indirectly via the interpellation process. Many observers claim that confrontation via interpellation has created a "crisis," the result of arbitrary allegations and competition between parliamentary blocs. Such arguments advocate or support an end to the democratic experiment in order to ensure the state's economic viability and social cohesion. Historical and quantitative analyses of interpellations, the actors, and the issues addressed since Kuwaiti independence in 1963 reveals four key elements which explain the post-invasion upsurge in the use of interpellation. Recommendations address the weaknesses of the current process and suggest how lawmakers could craft a more effective interpellation strategy to strengthen Kuwaiti democracy.