Silos in the port of Beirut after a partial collapse, Aug. 23, 2022. (Credit: Mohammed Yassine)
Aug. 4, 2024, will mark four long years since the Complaints Office of the Beirut Bar Association has been relentlessly striving to seek justice for the victims of the Beirut Port explosions that devastated large sections of the capital, claimed the lives of 235 people and injured 6,500 others.
On Thursday, the Beirut Bar Association organized an event at the Lawyers’ House to mark the fourth anniversary of the Beirut port explosion. Beirut Bar President Fadi Masri, along with representatives from the Complaints Office — including former Bar President Melhem Khalaf (founder of the office), Youssef Lahoud, Tammam Sahili, Chucri Haddad, Najib Hage-Chahine, and Abdo Ghossoub —were present.
They provided an update on their legal efforts and lamented the obstruction of the investigation led by Judge Tarek Bitar at the Court of Justice. The speakers criticized the numerous “abusive” appeals filed by implicated officials and a decision made in January 2023 by former chief prosecutor Ghassan Oueidat, which stripped Judge Bitar of his authority to issue arrest warrants and other documents. This measure has effectively hindered his ability to pursue the case efficiently.
“We are asking the prosecution to reverse its decision to receive notifications, arrest warrants and other documents from the investigative judge,” demanded Masri, referring to a request made by the Complaints Office to Jamal Hajjar, the interim successor to Oueidat.
“A decision must be made without further delay,” he emphasized. “The prosecution now bears a great responsibility to end impunity,” he asserted, insisting on “accountability for all those responsible for the explosion, regardless of their positions and affiliations.”
“It is a matter of trust in justice,” Masri said, revealing that the Bar would take “legal escalation measures” if the delays continue.
Upon assuming the head of the prosecution in February, Hajjar pledged to get the Aug. 4 case back on track. He held several meetings with Judge Bitar, but their discussions do not appear to have yielded any results.
‘Hacking and sabotaging’ of the Aug. 4 investigation
Beirut MP Melhem Khalaf, for his part, promised that the Complaints Office would continue its efforts “for a victory of justice.”
“We are exposed to major hacking and sabotage operations and face attempts to undermine our work,” he said, criticizing “the individuals implicated” in the case.
“We are committed to confronting all these harassments and attacks, even if we have to stand alone in the fight for justice,” he added.
The other speakers did not hold back their criticism of the prosecution. Lahoud accused it of “obstructing the work of the investigative judge and making unprecedented decisions against him.”
Sahili recalled that former prosecutor Oueidat “released detainees and facilitated their escape, an unprecedented move in the history of Lebanese justice.” She also noted that Oueidat had accused Judge Bitar of “usurpation of power,” despite having recused himself from the port case due to his familial ties with a former minister implicated in the affair.
Sahili indicated that the Complaints Office had filed complaints against him for “gross misconduct” and had also appealed to the judicial inspection authority. In this context, Haddad stated that the decisions of the former head of the prosecution “have obstructed the course of justice and left the case in a state of uncertainty.”
Other judges of the Court of Cassation have also failed in their duties, according to Lahoud. He recalled that in September 2021, the Complaints Office requested the removal of Deputy Prosecutor Ghassan Khoury on the grounds that “he did not fulfill his role as a representative of society.”
The same office also called for the recusal of two other deputy prosecutors, Imad Kabalan and Sabbouh Sleiman, who respectively suspended (in December 2022 and January 2024) arrest warrants issued in 2021 by Judge Bitar against former ministers Ali Hassan Khalil and Youssef Fenianos.
‘Paralyzing methodology’ hampers prosecution for Beirut Blast
Lahoud highlighted other obstacles to justice, including numerous recusal requests filed by implicated officials against the investigative judge and the judges responsible for ruling on these requests. He also mentioned actions for state liability against Judge Bitar’s actions. These cases are far from being resolved, as they are presented before the plenary assembly of the Court of Cassation, a supreme body that cannot convene due to a lack of quorum caused by unfilled retirements.
Such procedural maneuvers are part of a “paralyzing methodology,” said Chahine. The lawyer also criticized the “administration” for not granting Judge Bitar the authorization to prosecute public officials.
Despite all these obstacles, the speakers asserted that Bitar can continue his investigation.
In January 2023, he issued a legal precedent based on a study indicating that an investigative judge can only be removed by a joint decision of the Minister of Justice and the President of the Supreme Judicial Council who appointed him.
Sources at the Justice Palace confirmed that Judge Bitar continues to pursue his case, despite the prohibition placed on the judicial police from following his instructions. According to these sources, he is expected to issue his indictment in a few months, even if the implicated individuals refuse to appear before him.
This article was originally published in L'Orient-Le Jour, translated by Sahar Ghoussoub and edited by Yara Malka.
