[ad_1]
The response of the journalist Marcel Ghanem to the tweet of a judge who attacked him and attacked the Interior Minister in the interim government, Mohamed Fahmy, calling him “stupid”, was nothing more than a quick and urgent response to the placement of some Lebanese judges on their borders so that they would look at the Lebanese from the ground and stop. Flying towards utopianism and looking at the Lebanese from a high position.
The existing utopian discourse deserved this response, in which Ghanem said defiantly: “Fear not us” and “Save time” in which you threaten others. Ghanem was able to mobilize the supporters of his speech, those who realize that some of the judges entered the service through political mediation or judicial inheritance, and that some of them receive calls from politicians and influential people to change the course of the sentences. , and some of them withdraw from these cases when under pressure.
The Interior Minister did not add anything new when he said that there is corruption, political pressure and political obedience among the judges. In fact, the Lebanese President Michel Aoun, from his accession to power, met with the Supreme Council of the Judiciary and asked him to free himself from political pressure, and set himself as a reference to protect his independence.
But the error of my understanding was that it was almost generalized by saying that 95% of the judges are corrupt. It is a high number, compared with the tasks of the judicial body and its extension, and it is an exaggeration, but at the same time it expresses a reality that nobody ignores, not even among the judges who objected and denounced.
The reasons for the conviction and the attack on Ghanem and the Interior Minister are due to a utopian image that the judge enshrines of himself, related to speaking of integrity and independence. These are two slogans that the Judiciary has always raised, and judges are supposed to be committed to them if it had not been for the Lebanese system that crushed this image, once with interventions, another with political investments, and three times with appointments in Important positions. The refusal to sign the judicial appointments proposed by the Supreme Council of the Judiciary is nothing more than a confirmation that the judiciary is not isolated or independent from politics.
The second issue is that judges know that political corruption affects and annoys them. Announcing this reality would deepen the rupture of their image, especially at this stage, since the Lebanese have an independent, impartial and audacious judiciary to restore the rights of their owners and hold accountable state corruption, which is an international demand. Mosque. Consequently, the announcement of this aspect by the officials will call into question the integrity and independence of the Judiciary, and thus will prevent it from being an international destination to reform, combat corruption and return stolen money.
Fahmy’s statement, which is undoubtedly an exaggeration, generated much controversy and condemnation. Judges may be corrupt or linked to political agendas, or adhere to Lebanese norms regarding sectarian quotas. There is pressure on judges, but some dropped many cases when pressured. Some of them were left without promotion, due to quotas, and some of them were injured in various places.
The injustice is due to the fact that independence, impartiality and integrity are linked to financial adequacy, asceticism in office and the existence of independent, non-sectarian or political appointment mechanisms, which are conditions not available in Lebanon due to the nature of the system, and the governance mechanisms continued since the entity’s establishment, which were established during the period of Syrian presence in Lebanon, and deepened after its evacuation.
The judges had to correct, clarify and eliminate the confusion. They had to restore his image. They should emphasize that the judiciary is not an authority, but a body that obeys the law and does not threaten its authority. They had to discover the flaws and loopholes while defending the many wronged. But the attack and utopianism, an unrealistic rhetoric, resembles the exaggeration of the interior minister in his trial.
Following the statement of the Minister of the Interior, the Supreme Council of the Judiciary clarified in a statement that “what was issued against the Judiciary and the judges is unacceptable and absolutely inadmissible and incorrect, especially for those who are supposed to work on the construction of the The State and the institutions, knowing that the Judiciary fulfills a large part of the tasks entrusted to it in circumstances that are more than difficult, they expect the support of all authorities and institutions ”.
In turn, the Lebanese Judges Club responded to Fahmy in a statement saying: “It is a pleasure for the minister of the ‘two dead’, who is negligent in protecting and guarding the courthouses, which allowed the entry of two bombs in the Beirut Courthouse and the escape of the prisoners from the Baabda Courthouse glasses, the owner of improvised decisions, denying the role The administration of justice, the continued abuse of the judiciary. “
[ad_2]
