[ad_1]
Al-Mustaqbal denies accusations of “defamation of the record”: moving forward to correct the legal path
Lebanese Acting Prime Minister Hassan Diab refused, yesterday (Monday), to be questioned by the judicial investigator in the Beirut port bomb attack, Judge Fadi Sawan, who accused him and three former ministers of negligence in relation to with the explosion. The two former ministers, Ali Hassan Khalil and Ghazi Zuaiter, refused to appear before the judicial investigator, because they are deputies and enjoy parliamentary immunity, amid denials from the “future” of any “sectarian” approach to the file, and the affirmation that his position aims to “correct the legal and constitutional path” that imposes a trial. Presidents and ministers of the Supreme Council, to be tried for the charges that are imputed to them in this file.
It resolved Diab’s refusal to receive Sawan, the controversy that has existed for days, which showed that there was a rejection of his claim by key figures and parties in the country, some of which considered his step “political and selective.” Yesterday Diab did not go to the government palace to carry out his usual activities of receiving visitors, and replaced him by receiving two personalities at his home, noting that he had moved his residence from the government palace to his home since his resignation from the government, and content with holding her official meetings solely on the Serail.
An official source in the Prime Minister’s Office said that Sawan called Diab’s office last week to request an appointment with him, yesterday (Monday), but was informed of Diab’s refusal to submit to questioning. The information later reported that a new session to hear from Sawan Diab had been scheduled later this week, amid estimates that his fate would be similar to the session that was scheduled for yesterday.
Dealing with the prosecution applies to Diab, over Khalil and Zuaiter, as Khalil said he would not attend because he was only informed of his summons by the media, while Zuaiter said he is committed to articles 40 and 70 of the Constitution , “and so far we have not been informed of the reason for our citation.”
The accusations made by Sawan last week drew strong criticism from influential parties, including Prime Minister Saad Hariri, Dar Al Fatwa and “Hezbollah.” Some politicians said Sawan was selective in determining who would accuse them and that he exceeded his powers in directing the charges at ministers. But others, such as the Beirut Bar Association, said their decision proved courage.
Yesterday, the interim Interior Minister, Mohamed Fahmy, affirmed his support and solidarity with the position of the Mufti of the Republic and the Supreme Council of Islamic Sharia by “refusing to attack the position of the prime minister in the explosion of the port of Beirut” .
Rejection of the “future”
The Movement of the Future refuses to consider the reactions to Sawan’s decision as sectarian, as a member of the “Future” bloc, Deputy Muhammad al-Hajjar, confirmed that the response came “with the aim of correcting the legal path” and control it “under the roof of the law and the constitution.” Al-Hajjar confirmed to Al-Sharq al-Awsat that the movement “wanted to indicate that the prosecution of the prime minister is carried out in accordance with constitutional principles through the Supreme Council of Responsibility of Presidents and Ministers”, in compliance with article 70 of the constitution, “as long as the prosecution is carried out under suspicion”, noting that the constitutional article allows the president to be tried OR the minister before the Supreme Council in cases of high treason and non-compliance with his functions, while The person responsible will be tried before the judicial court if he commits a crime as a natural person in his private life, as stipulated in Resolution 31 issued by the Civil Court of Cassation in 2000.
The aforementioned decision was issued in 2000 as a result of the complaint by the civilian judiciary against former Minister of State for the Economy Fouad Siniora, and the Court of Cassation, in its decision, prevented the criminal judiciary from prosecuting Siniora, given that the The accusation against him demands that the parliament claim him with a two-thirds majority and his judgment before the Supreme Council of Presidents and ministers for trial. Of parliamentarians and judges.
Al-Hajjar said that the second part of the objection is based on the fact that what Sawan had done “went beyond constitutional and legal principles”, as “he accused them after having previously announced that the prosecution was not among his prerogatives, and on this basis he addressed his letter to the House of Representatives, and the Bureau of the House replied that the file does not include evidence. Al-Hajjar said: “ What Sawan has done exceeds his constitutional powers, ” noting that “ he has joined a political track since 2016 in the way the pact was treated, with the third presidential office and the attempt to confiscate the powers stipulated in a constitution for the appointment and consultation process and the Supreme Defense Council and refused to sign the decrees of the council employees. Service and others ».
He explained: “The complaint came in this context, that’s why we raised the red flag, not to prevent the truth from being revealed, as some claim, but to correct the legal path, and not with a sectarian background that some intend to put in this context “, stressing that investigations should be conducted, who brought an ammonium nitrate vaporizer, and how it was emptied, prompting the bombing of the Beirut port on August 4.
Amal Movement
File mounted objections; The political bureau of the Amal Movement stopped yesterday before the measures taken by the judicial investigator in the port crime, and the office affirmed its willingness to “keep the investigation away from any politicization, leading to the full truth in this file, defining responsibilities legal and taking action against all perpetrators and negligents. ” .
The political bureau of the movement, headed by the president of Parliament Nabih Berri, considered that “what was issued by the judicial investigator contradicts the established constitutional and legal norms that the investigator himself confirmed in his letter to Parliament on 11/26/2020. Which was received by the organ of the House of Representatives, considering that it is necessary to complete the file and present the documents to build on what is required, and initiate the necessary procedures, and this did not happen. In effect, what really happened is circumventing constitutional articles 40 and 70 of the Constitution, without any justification. He stressed that “what happened raises questions about the direction of the investigation and its procedures, and the fear of losing it, and takes us away from the principles necessary to discover the truth and do justice to the martyrs and victims.”
On the other hand, the protesters held a sit-in, in front of the Beirut Palace of Justice, in solidarity with the judicial investigator for the crime of the attack on the port of Beirut, Judge Fadi Sawan. Hayat Arslan delivered a speech in which he affirmed “absolute support for Judge Sawan” and said: “Every perpetrator must be cited and must not withdraw, because his authority belongs to the people. We are betting that he occupies a historical position, and the judiciary must once again be an independent authority. We demand that he be registered as a hero, because the officials of this country are trying to take the matter to their sects for their own interests.
[ad_2]
