[ad_1]
The security services had to declare their weapons against Law 191, arguing that its implementation means preventing them from exerting pressure and torture on the detainees and adopting technical methods to search for evidence.
However, it is surprising that the strike stems from the provisions of the Law on the Organization of the Judicial Power and the Law of Criminal Procedure, which is the guarantor of public freedoms and protector of the rights of citizens to obtain fair trials.
This is how the roles have been reversed between the security agencies that have come to ensure, even on the table, that they are going to implement the law, and between the judges who are waging an open battle on the basis of “Oh murderer, dead “, Given that the immunity that has transformed some judges into” demigods “will inevitably disappear with the implementation of the Law, and they will no longer be out of accountability. Note that it is not the first law to criminalize judges.
Judges: these are our justifications
The judges declare that what provoked them is the last point of the third article, which indicated that “the investigator, whether a judge of the Public Ministry or a member of the judicial police, is subject to a prison sentence of three months to one year and a fine ranging from two million Lebanese pounds to 10 million Lebanese if none of the guarantees provided by law are observed.
Here is the heart of the dispute, as the opposing judges consider this article “unacceptable”. However, they try to add other objections to save appearances, among them the fear that the presence of the lawyer in the preliminary investigations will have a negative role in teaching the detainee the testimony they deem appropriate, and the inability of the judicial police to expedite the investigation. interrogation and exposing cells, especially in crimes of terrorism, homicide, kidnapping and haste, considering that the 24-hour limit to attend to the lawyer can be the reason for the escape of the rest of the gang to which a detainee belongs or to kill a person kidnapped, for example.
They also point out that outposts and detachments are not equipped with the simplest tools, so how will investigations be filmed with audio and video, as stipulated by law? This question shows that the judges are trying to play the role of the king more than the king himself, and the security services confirm that they are working to equip the investigation centers with the necessary equipment to implement the law!
The “Supreme Judiciary” is angry with Aoun
In addition to these objections, the judges allege that the Parliamentary Commission for Administration and Justice did not request the opinion of the Supreme Council of the Judiciary (its opinion) on the law before referring it to the General Assembly of the Council of Representatives.
Some jurists point out that the search for the opinion of the “Supreme Judicial Power” is not mandatory in this law, and the provisions of article 5 of the Law of Organization of the Judicial Power do not apply to it, considering that it is a reform of the law. Criminal Procedure Code.
Some go further and emphasize that Parliament owns itself, in support of articles 8 and 20 of the Lebanese constitution, which stipulate that “the conditions and limits of judicial guarantee are established by law, and the promulgating authority is independent to determine, protect and establish those guarantees “.
In any case, the judges who oppose the existence of a legal vacuum by ignoring the opinion of the Supreme Council of the Judiciary are the same ones who bypassed the powers of the council and ignored its existence.
Therefore, the “Supreme Judicial Power” pours its anger on the Appellate Prosecutor in Monte Líbano, Judge Ghada Aoun, who expressed his dissatisfaction with the law to the President of the Republic, bypassing the Council.
Ghada Aoun obtained the signatures of more than 170 judges for the petition to reject Law 191
This guilt was evident in the statement issued by the Council of the Judiciary on Saturday, when he stressed that “there is nothing that prevents judges from making proposals in this regard to the Council in accordance with the text of article 44 of the Law of the Judiciary, which must be fulfilled as the only legal route. It can be diverted or overlooked. ‘
Aoun doesn’t mind this anger. Rather, he asks in front of his visitors: “Do you want to prevent me from visiting?” Noting that he sought refuge in the Supreme Judicial Council, before addressing Baabda, while others claim that he did the opposite.
In the context of forming a “lobby” to pressure the president of the republic and urge him to defy the law, Aoun points out to his colleagues that Law 191 is an exact copy of a United Nations project. He explains that he made a detailed search for a law similar to Law 191 in France, but did not find it, ignoring a set of laws that punish judges and members of the judiciary for violating the basic guarantees of detainees and denying justice.
The appeal group
Today, Aoun seems busy collecting the signatures of the judges, as one of the advisers to the President of the Republic, Michel Aoun, whispered in the ear to the “president” that the signature of the judges of a petition detailing the loopholes of the Law 191 would be a way out of Aoun’s lack of shame after signing the law and publishing it in the official gazette.
To this end, Aoun managed, with the support of various judges and prosecutors, to obtain 170 signatures, the majority of which were judges working in the criminal judiciary. They joined a group on WhatsApp called “The Stabbing Group”, to coordinate their next steps. With the knowledge that the Judges Club did not interact with this petition, neither negatively nor positively!
On the other hand, the defending judges appear in a state of shock, since the volume of objections is “terrifying” and represents a quarter of the practicing judges. They point out that this percentage reflects the need to change the mindset and culture of judges, and renounce their vision of inferiority towards the judicial police, lawyers and citizens, highlighting that this law is “an achievement for those who consider themselves servants of the citizenry and they achieve justice. ”
In conclusion, it seems as usual that the majority of the judges are the silent majority, as only about 70 judges interacted in the WhatsApp group, knowing that the names of the majority of the signatories remain confidential. Consequently, judges are divided between those who refuse to apply this law in any way possible, and between defenders, and others point out that a slight amendment to it will make it acceptable, “but we will not work to confront it or prevent its implementation, especially because it has entered into force after its publication in the Official Gazette ”.
But will the opponents come to a conclusion? They have 5 days before the deadline to present the appeal (which ends on Friday), while observers confirm that the President of the Republic will not take the steps that Judge Aoun is trying to commercialize through WhatsApp. Consequently, the “president” will return with an empty basket from her visit to Baabda in the next few days, and the law will not be transferred to the Constitutional Council to stop its implementation.
Only amending the law is the most likely option. It is also the option suggested by the “Supreme Judicial Power” in its declaration. The objecting judges carry “Plan B” in their pockets when urging a parliamentarian to present an urgent and reiterated law that is referred directly to the Administration and Justice Commission, which includes a single article, which is the abolition of the clause of imprisonment of judges in case of violation of Law 191, and the possibility of being satisfied with their fine.
On the other hand, others emphasize that this plan will not achieve the objectors’ objectives either, due to the conduct of some members of the Administration and Justice Committee in proposing other laws that complement what Law 191 began.
Judges vs lawyers
A leaked statement from Mount Lebanon Attorney General of Appeals, Judge Ghada Aoun, provoked a large number of lawyers on WhatsApp, in which she states that Law 191 serves the lawyer who only cares about his financial interest, noting that the presence of the lawyer in the preliminary investigations will increase the fortunes of the lawyers. .
The director of the Northern Bar Association, Muhammad al-Murad, emphasizes that “lawyers are not a stick figure”, telling Al-Akhbar: “I am not an attacker or a challenger, but I do not accept what some judges say about harming lawyers. “
Subscribe to «News» on YouTube here
