I was summoned to investigate the explosion of the port, owned by Parliament

Former Minister and Deputy of the Development and Liberation Bloc, Ghazi Zuaiter, said: “Only the constitution says where the judicial judge, Fadi Sawan, in charge of the investigation of the Beirut port explosion, or no one else, made a mistake, noting that the main role in the interpretation of the constitution and the laws corresponds to the parliament “, considering that” what we have seen In recent times, with respect to the judicial allegations of Judge Sawan in the port file, there are a large number of interpreters of the constitution and laws, and they are all in their temperament. Or they have no authority to interpret the constitution, they made some mistakes. “

Zuaiter explained to Al-Anbaa, who is among the three ministers who were charged in the port explosion in his capacity as a former Minister of Labor, that he had heard in the media that he had been summoned to the audience for the purpose to question him and that he had not appeared because he had not been formally informed of the decision, explaining that, “it did happen.” He was subsequently cited, because the matter is still under consideration and is the property of Parliament, considering that “the judicial investigator, Sawan, had previously contacted Parliament and told him that these are his powers and he did not enter me, and then the Council responded to Judge Sawan by providing him with documents proving or confirming this grave suspicion. That said, who, in turn, did not respond to parliament, and then came back and said that these are my powers. “

And he considered that “the powers are indivisible and not distributed, but only one party has this authority,” noting that Judge Sawan said with all her mouth that this is the authority of the Council and based on Article 70 of the Constitution, which Judge Sawan misinterpreted.

Zuaiter considered that “the practical response to the recent complaints by Judge Fadi Sawan in the case of the port explosion came from the Bureau of the House of Representatives, which discussed at its meeting the letter that the judicial investigator sent to parliament, the content of which revealed a contradiction in his claims. “

Zuaiter expressed regret for some of the charges that were issued, especially by the president of the Beirut Bar Association, Melhem Khalaf, and some members of the Bar Council, while other lawyers had expressed their correct legal and constitutional opinion.

Regarding the parliamentary immunity and the protection it provides to the MP, Zuaiter affirmed that he “is not opposed to forming a parliamentary commission of investigation for the crime of the port explosion.” And he considered that “although the constitution and the law provide this protection, but if I am responsible or guilty, I assume my responsibility and do not take refuge in the constitution.” I demand that the constitution be implemented with transparency and precision. “

Zuaiter explained that “he will present to the competent authorities with authority all the documents related to his role, attributions and duties in the ministry when he was Minister of Public Works and Transportation”, expressing his regret for some of the positions that were adopted according to the goals, agenda and special political position, highlighting the need to arrive at a position that is in the interest of the law and the constitution. First of all, it is in the interest of Lebanon and the families of the victims of the attack in the port, even if it requires the investigation to take months to uncover the truth and the real criminal, which begins from the moment the ship arrives to the moment the ammonium nitrate detonates.