“Lebanon Debate”
Before the Constitutional Council prepared its report on the appeal submitted by representatives of the Free Patriotic Movement to the law postponing autopsies for leaders of the security services, Lebanon Debate learned that the Council had written to the Minister of Defense on 1/5/2024, requesting from him a list of the names of the heads of the military or security services affiliated with his ministry.
The response came from the Minister of Defense on January 10, 2024, stating that there are 3 officers who fit this description: Army Commander Joseph Aoun, Major General Pierre Saab, and Major General Muhammad Mustafa.
This correspondence opened the door widely to the question of who applies to the head of a security or military apparatus, especially since General Joseph Aoun is the commander of the army, not the head of an apparatus, and Major General Imad Othman is the Director General of the Internal Security Forces, not the head of an apparatus.
Also according to the correspondence, can the Minister of Defense’s response be considered as proof of the right of other officers to be covered by the law, and therefore how will this law be interpreted in the next stage?
In an interview with Lebanon Debate, a member of the Political Council of the Free Patriotic Movement, lawyer Wadih Akl, pointed out this problem that no one had noticed, especially since the law was extended to all leaders of the security services without specifying who the leaders of the security services are, and the logical explanation here is that it includes All service commanders who hold the rank of Major General, meaning that Major General Pierre Saab, who will be referred to retirement on September 27, 2024, and Major General Mohamed Mustafa, Secretary General of the Supreme Defense Council, who will retire on October 4, 2027, benefit from the law, and therefore it must be extended. They have an extra year.
But doesn’t this mean that if other officers are promoted to the rank of major general, they will have the right to request an extension for an additional year? Lawyer Akl does not rule this out, noting that “they may demand that they obtain the same privilege as those who hold the rank of major general or general general as their acquired rights. This law has created a major problem and is an actual result of legal irregularity.”
Commenting on the minutes of the Constitutional Council, which did not reach a decision, he considered that “it came under political influence, but that does not mean accusing the Council of being politicized. However, reaching “no decision” means that the Council did not reach a majority to take the decision, which suggests that more than Half of the Council members supported the appeal, but the decision did not receive the required constitutional majority, i.e. 7 out of 10.”
Lawyer Akl shows all respect to the council, but regrets that he “did not reach a decision. What is important in the matter is that the decision be taken, whether positive or negative.”
He does not consider that “what happened is a setback for the movement, because it is proceeding in accordance with legal principles, and he confirms that if the council’s decision was issued against the appeal, the answer would inevitably be, ‘We bow and respect.’ If the law was invalidated, we would have reaped a result, but today there is no decision.”
This non-decision was raised by the head of the Constitutional Council, Judge Tannous Meshleb, as it was not the first time that a decision had not been issued, and Judge Meshleb demanded at that time that the Council’s law should be amended; Because it is not possible for there not to be a decision, and today lawyer Akl joins him in this demand, and it is necessary to think seriously about amending the text to make it more compatible with legal logic.
2024-01-31 15:33:34
#ambiguous #extension #Aoun #Othman.. #Minister #Defense #added #officers #list #LebanonDebate
