Free Patriotic Movement leader Gebran Bassil (L) offers condolences to Army Commander Joseph Aoun on Jan. 8, 2024. (Credit: Photo taken from the Lebanese Army's official Facebook page)
Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) leader Gebran Bassil has taken action and launched a new phase in his battle against Army Chief Joseph Aoun. Bassil, who has found himself more isolated than ever on the political scene, particularly among Christians, was dismayed when the office of Army Chief Joseph Aoun was extended for a year on Dec. 15.
As planned, the FPM filed a challenge before the Constitutional Council to invalidate the law passed to keep General Aoun and the rest of the security apparatus heads in their posts for a year.
By taking this step, Bassil has first and foremost, fulfilled his threat of referring the matter to the Constitutional Council once the law has been published in the Official Gazette.
On a strictly political level, Bassil wants to save face and avenge the bitter defeat he has suffered, especially after his near abandonment by his long-standing ally, Hezbollah.
L’Orient-Le Jour learned that the challenge was filed on Jan. 4, a week after the law was published in the Official Gazette.
The FPM’s challenge asserts that the law extending the Army Chief’s term should not be valid, because parliamentary sessions at this time should be dedicated solely to electing a president.
Constitution Article 74 stipulates that in case of a presidential vacuum, Parliament becomes an exclusively electoral body.
The law was nonetheless adopted during a parliamentary session which was held in consideration of legislation necessity, a concept that Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has put forward to justify holding sessions amid the presidential vacancy.
On another level, “the text adopted Dec. 15 undermines the principle of separation of powers,” said former Justice Minister Salim Jreissati, who co-wrote the challenge.
He explained that Parliament can’t usurp the duty to appoint Grade One civil servants because of the cabinet’s inertia.
This is thinly veiled criticism of the fact that the cabinet, which was supposed to extend Joseph Aoun’s term of office, was unable to hold a meeting on Dec. 15 due to a lack of quorum. Parliament therefore took charge of keeping all security chiefs in their posts.
“Another important point in the challenge is that the new legislation does not respect the generality principle,” Jreissati said. “The text almost names the people that will be affected by the law, insofar as it stipulates that it applies to those who are still in service.”
Contrary to what the FPM hopes, some experts rule out the possibility that the Constitutional Council would invalidate the law.
“Firstly, because the text does not only apply to Joseph Aoun, but also all the security apparatus’ heads,” said Shukri Sader, former head of the State Shura Council. Sader noted that in May, the Constitutional Council had already ruled in favor of “legislation of necessity” under special circumstances.
What then, will the Constitutional Council do? It is perhaps too early to answer this question, considering that the 10 members have until Feb. 4 to issue a decision. A quorum of eight out of ten members needs to be secured, bearing in mind that the Constitutional Council passes decisions when approved by a majority of seven members.
Nothing personal?
It is therefore through a lack of a quorum — the usual weapon used when a major decision needs to be taken— that Bassil risks suffering another defeat at the hands of his rivals.
Notably, the challenge was signed by ten MPs, including Bassil himself and his closest associates, but by no “insubordinate” MPs within the FPM bloc, which suggests that they do not endorse the move.
Several Bassil dissidents have expressed to the press that they considered it “inappropriate” for the FPM to carry on with its battle against the Army Chief amid war times.
Speaking to L’Orient-Le Jour, a number of these Bassil objectors declined to comment, although they did not express any clear objections.
On the other hand, efforts are being made to highlight cohesion within the FPM’s parliamentary bloc on this issue. “We are against the principle of extension and that is why we referred the matter to the Constitutional Council,” said MP Nada Boustani, who is close to Bassil and a signatory of the challenge. Her statement alludes that there is nothing personal in the tug-of-war between the FPM and the Army Chief, who much to Bassil’s dismay, is perceived as one of the most serious contenders for the presidency.
In his most recent press conference, Bassil spoke inflammatory about the issue and didn’t mince his words when he accused General Aoun of “treason” and “corruption.”
This didn’t stop Bassil from paying a visit to the St-Therese church in Fayyadieh on Monday to offer his condolences to Gen. Aoun for the death of his mother.
This was the first instance of direct contact between the two men since the beginning of the battle over the term extension.
Bassil was preceded by an FPM delegation, as well as his father-in-law, former President Michel Aoun, who had appointed Gen. Aoun to his post in 2017.
“It is very normal for us to meet our duties at a personal and social level,” said Martine Najm Koteily, FPM vice-president for political affairs.
“We want everyone to understand that we are the only party that defends sovereignty, reform and proper running of the institutions,” said FPM MP Cesar Abi Khalil.
This article was originally published in French in L'Orient-Le Jour. Translation by Joelle El Khoury.