POLITICS : Democracy Activists Gear Up in Kuwait : They hope to convince the public that the government’s National Council is a hoax.

Kuwait will convene a 75-member National Council on Tuesday in what the government calls a first step toward democratization but opposition leaders see as an unconstitutional hoax.

Democratic activists plan to meet Sunday to discuss ways of discrediting the council, which they see as a government deceit to give the appearance of political progress while keeping power tightly in the hands of the ruling Sabah family.

The opposition’s ability to mobilize public opinion in the face of press controls and a ban on public gatherings will test its leadership and the prospects for meaningful democratic reform in Kuwait.

“The National Council is only part of the whole strategy of the government--our opposition is to the whole package,” said Abdullah Naibairi, spokesman for the Kuwaiti Democratic Forum, one of seven opposition groups. “We must push the ruling family toward the idea of power-sharing.”

Many Kuwaitis are dismayed at what they see as the Bush Administration’s reluctance to use its postwar clout to press the Sabahs toward speedy democratization. Last month, Secretary of State James A. Baker III said the Sabah rule “may not be the optimum type of regime.” But he defended the emir’s pledge to hold elections in October, 1992, and to consider extending the vote to women.

“I was so angry when I read that,” said Kuwaiti feminist Sana Humoud. “We expect more from the Americans. They know what democracy is and what freedom is, and they should help the Kuwaitis get democracy.”

What the opposition wants--and what many ordinary Kuwaitis say they want--is reinstatement of Kuwait’s 1962 constitution, suspended by the emir, Sheik Jabbar al Ahmed al Sabah, in 1986. Considered the most liberal in the Persian Gulf, the constitution vests executive power in the emir, who rules through an appointed prime minister, traditionally the crown prince.

Legislative authority is shared by the emir and a Parliament elected by native-born Kuwaiti men whose families have lived in the emirate since 1920. The electorate is about 62,000 men, 8% of Kuwaiti citizens and a small fraction of the emirate’s estimated prewar population of 2.2 million.

Despite the tiny franchise, the Parliament elected in 1985 was a symbol of Kuwait’s political tolerance until it proved so boisterous that Jabbar dissolved it in 1986. Last spring, after a rash of pro-democracy protests, he announced the formation of a National Council with 50 elected and 25 appointed members. Billed as a transition to democracy, the council is purely advisory.

The opposition denounced the council as unconstitutional, demanded the restoration of Parliament and boycotted June, 1990, elections to select its members. The council had met only a few times before the Aug. 2 invasion, and many interpreted Jabbar’s wartime promises of democratic reform to mean it would not be revived. But on June 2, the emir set the election date 15 months away and announced that, meantime, the council would reconvene. The government has yet to indicate what its mission will be.

Some Kuwaitis see the council’s revival as a step toward political normalcy. “Democratic life will come back,” said Dr. Ebrahim Abdulhadi, a hospital administrator. “Maybe good things will happen. . . . It’s temporary. So give them a chance.”

More Kuwaitis expect it to function as an agency for government largess. Kuwait city is rife with rumors that the council will gain instant popularity by asking the government to give $33,000 to each Kuwaiti family--including those who fled the country--as compensation for suffering during the Iraqi occupation.

“They will try to show that they are not a (rubber) stamp, because everybody is laughing at them now,” said Dr. Hazem Rumaih, who is organizing into a new political force the neighborhood resistance groups that fought the Iraqis.

“And after polishing their names during this period, they will stand for the Parliament (in 1992).”

Others worry that the council may amend the constitution to dilute Parliament’s powers, gerrymander voting districts or change election laws to undermine the pro-democracy movement.

Even if it proves harmless, some see it as a symbol of continuing highhandedness by the Sabahs--and an ominous portent. “Even with the election next year, there is no guarantee that the Parliament will continue,” said Gulf Bank Chairman Abdulaziz Sultan, a government critic. “Unless they abide by the constitution, there are no guarantees.”