[ad_1]
The differences between the deputies and ministers of the “Free Patriotic Movement” in Lebanon came to light, reflecting the depth of the crisis facing the party.
Disputes and crises are likely to worsen in light of sanctions imposed by Washington on the movement’s leader, Gebran Bassil, the son-in-law of Lebanese President Michel Aoun.
After the disagreement between Bassil and the leader of the contest in the “current”, the adviser to the president of the republic, Antoine Haddad, differences arose between the ministerial team affiliated with the “movement” and the deputies of the bloc headed by Bassil in a context of criminal financial control.
Bassil and his ministers are lobbying Prime Minister Hassan Diab to carry out a criminal financial audit on Lebanon’s institutions, while the Finance and Budget Committee, which is also headed by MP Ibrahim Kanaan, is calling for amendments to the Monetary and Credit Law before the start of the audit.
The media dispute began with the words of the Minister of Justice Marie Claude Negm (affiliated with Bassil): “The one who asked to amend the law is the one who prevented the criminal scrutiny from being completed”, referring to the parliamentary commission headed by Kanaan.
The committee is calling for a legal amendment to allow the lifting of bank secrecy, which would allow the Banque du Liban to provide information about clients, but this requirement is being rejected by various ministers and politicians.
Canaan responded, describing Najm as the minister of “justice.” She said in her tweet on Twitter: “The Justice Minister woke up from her failure after nine months of no achievement, and found nothing more than to insult the Money Committee, which is known for its strict oversight work, especially at the level of budgets and financial accounts, to divert attention from a ministerial balance equal to zero and errors. Legality delayed criminal scrutiny, “he asked,” Are you sure you are the Minister of Justice ?! ”
The debate continued, with Najm describing Canaan as “the head of the Committee for the Collapse of Money and the Budget.” She said: “I don’t expect a testimony from the head of the Committee on the Collapse of Money and Budget. Let him say what he wants, and the people are the referee.” He reiterated that “the criminal audit does not need to reform the law.”
Public debates among Basil’s team did not stop at this point, but his circle expanded to include parliamentarians and ministers, each of whom stood on the side of this or that front.
Movement member Alan Aoun supported his colleague, Representative Kanaan, defending the Finance Committee’s work, saying on Twitter: “Some blame the Finance and Budget Committee for opposing the government’s ‘explosive belt’ financial plan. resigned (who responded to the objection of the committee), regardless of the financial debate – The legitimate economist, should have noticed that a parliamentary commission that crossed the blocks did not print as usual on the canned government policies, but restored the audit work of the House of Representatives.
Also on the ministerial line, the Minister for Displaced Persons of the interim government, Ghada Shreim, who is also affiliated with the President of the Republic and the “movement”, expressed solidarity with Najm and said on Twitter: “Everyone’s fondness for bank secrecy I was attracted to … something big and beautiful and necessary Her interest after private money flew away and public funds were looted.
After this lengthy debate and mutual accusations, the head of the “Free Patriotic Movement” got on the line to announce a mediating position between the two parties, saying that “the financial criminal audit is a patriotic duty and the movement’s position is a “.
Basil wrote yesterday on his Twitter account: “The anatomical scrutiny of the Banque du Liban accounts is a national duty and an absolute priority and a door for scrutiny of all public spending. It shows the financial gap, shows the crimes and reveals the fate of the looted, gifted and transferred funds. ”
He added that “the government must impose scrutiny by force of existing laws, the House of Representatives must support and strengthen it, and the Bank of Lebanon must respond immediately under pressure from the rights of the people.” To ensure the investigation is completed and not hinder it. ”
But Bassil’s attempt to put an end to the “internal” debate, by saying that the position of “the movement is one”, does not mean that there are no differences in his party or that they stop there, especially because it is not the first time they appear in public.
Previously, differences within the movement led to the departure of leaders and parliamentarians from the parliamentary bloc and the movement alike, including Naim Aoun, the nephew of President Michel Aoun.
A former main source of the movement commented: “What is happening today is something natural (produced by) the politics that Basil has followed since he inherited the leadership of the party, and we are in contact with people within the movement. We hear from them the scope of the criticisms and objections to what Basil is doing, and the sanctions against him have confirmed this matter. Let us warn of what things may turn out in the next stage and his reflection on the current in general, and among them are the businessmen who have their interests and fear for them if these sanctions are extended ”.
The “Strong Lebanon” parliamentary bloc, headed by Bassil, lives a situation of disagreements that led to the withdrawal of independent representatives of the same during the last year, and this happened with the representatives Naama Afram and Michel Al-Daher and the resigned deputy Michel Moawad, in addition to Deputy Brigadier General Shamilkoz, who is finally Michel Aoun’s second son-in-law, and The public dispute that arose with the Vice President of Parliament, Elie Ferzli, who is also a member of Basil’s bloc.
