Family members of the port blast victims protest outside of Parliament on July 26, 2022. (Credit: Kabalan Farah/L'Orient Today)
BEIRUT — Hours after Parliament voted on Tuesday to select members of the Supreme Council, a body tasked with prosecuting ministers and MPs, families of the port blast victims condemned the move as a ploy to avoid prosecution for the Aug. 4, 2020 explosion.
The families called the council “heresy and a devil’s play to avoid the forensic investigation and the Court of Justice [in order] to prevent their prosecution in any crime,” the families said in a statement.
The Supreme Council, made up of 15 members — seven MPs and eight judges — was created in 1990 under the terms of the Taif Agreement. The body, which needs a two-thirds majority to make a decision, has the power to convict and sentence high-ranking officials. But in practice, its authority has never been used.
Former Justice Minister Marie Claude Najem told L’Orient Today that the Supreme Council “has never convened because there was no case referred to it by Parliament.”
Multiple legal experts, who asked not to be named, told L’Orient Today the same, with one of them noting that this failure to convene is due to the fact that a vote of two-thirds of Parliament is needed to refer someone to the council, a threshold that is very hard to achieve.
Over the years, Parliament had considered referring a handful of high-profile cases to the council — including the case of the former Industry Minister Shahi Barsoumian in which he was accused embezzlement and corruption, as well one case involving former Finance Minister Fouad Sinoura and another involving former President Amin Gemayel — but those cases were ultimately not sent to the council, according to the experts.
“There were investigations from some committees which ended in preventing the prosecution of Gemayel and Sinioura,” Najem told L’Orient Today.
Parliament’s Supreme Council election this week is of particular interest to those concerned with the Aug. 4, 2020 port blast file and related investigation; if granted approval by Parliament, the council will be tasked with prosecuting officials implicated in the explosion.
The MPs selected on Tuesday by Parliament to sit on the council were: Jamil al-Sayyed (pro-March 8/Baalbeck-Hermel), Abdul Karim Kabbara (Related to Future/Tripoli), Faysal al-Sayegh (Progressive Socialist Party/Beirut II), Hagop Pakradounian (Tashnag/Metn), George Atallah (Free Patriotic Movement/Koura), Imad el-Hout (Independent/Beirut II) and Tony Frangieh (Marada Movement/Zgharta). However, Sayegh later pulled out, presenting a dilemma, a legal source told L’Orient Today. Sayegh, a Druze, must be replaced by someone from the same sect according to the rules in place; however, none of the other Druze MPs would agree to enter the council.
Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati has defended the use of the Supreme Council to try officials implicated in the port blast case.
“The government's position is clear. We do not interfere in the [work of the] judiciary, but it must respect the constitutional frameworks,” he said in December 2021. “Just as a soldier must be tried before the Military Court, a minister must be tried before a special court.”
‘How can a criminal punish himself?’
The victims’ families, on the other hand, have opposed MPs and ministers being referred to the council. The families asked in their statement Tuesday: “How can a criminal punish himself? And a prosecutor prosecute himself? And how can we trust a Court of Justice that never did anything?”
“In principle, the Supreme Council has been mentioned in the Constitution, so we can’t simply deny it,” Wael Hammam, an attorney who is part of the Lawyers’ Committee for the Defense of Protesters, told L’Orient Today.
“In terms of the port explosion investigation, the election of the council is in line with trying to transfer the port explosion case from the hands of [the head of the investigation] Judge Tarek Bitar, to this council, which would never work properly,” he said. “The role of the Supreme Council is not to rule in a gigantic case like the port explosion where it is considered manslaughter, but is limited to cases where there is a misuse of authority.”
The port investigation has been suspended for months due to requests to remove Bitar by former ministers and MPs who have been sought for questioning in the case. Each time such a request is filed, it automatically pauses the investigation until the Higher Judicial Council rules on the request. The process has been further delayed because the Higher Judicial Council currently lacks three members, who are yet to be replaced.
Stalled appointments
Formation of the Supreme Council to try top officials could also be stalled by delays in judicial appointments in general across Lebanon.
In a tweet posted during Tuesday’s Parliament meeting, MP Mark Daou (Forces of Change/Chouf) wrote that the judicial appointments, which are needed in order to complete the Supreme Council, have been “disabled by the president.” In June 2020, President Michel Aoun refused to sign judicial appointments submitted by Najem, the justice minister at the time. The appointments have not been signed by Aoun to this day.
The MPs selected for the council were elected by acclamation Tuesday. The Lebanese Forces’ parliamentary bloc, the Strong Republic, as well as the Kataeb and the Forces of Change MPs — the bloc of 13 MPs associated with the Oct. 17 protest movement — did not nominate any candidates to the posts.
MP Sami Gemayel, the head of the Kataeb party, said during the Parliament session that the Supreme Council is “useless” because such matters should be referred to the judiciary.
“The election of the Supreme Council in this historical political period in Lebanon is to twist justice in the case of the port investigation and is a way to avoid any accountability,” MP Ibrahim Mneimneh (Forces of Change/Beirut II) said in a tweet Monday.
Asked about the role of the judges on the council, attorney Hammam said, “In normal circumstances the presence of eight judges is good, but in Lebanon, where I get asked first if I know the judge if I get appointed to a case, the judiciary is politicized.”
He added, “Besides, a majority of judges doesn’t mean anything if the Supreme Council’s voting is two-thirds. … The solution for the port blast investigation to reach justice is that it be considered a purely legal file and for it to be allowed to take its course.”