MPs who filed their appeal with the Constitutional Council surrounding Judges' Club president Najat Abou Chacra (3rd from left) and Legal Agenda director Nizar Saghiyeh (2nd from right). (Credit: Photo courtesy of L.A.)
Eleven MPs filed an appeal to the Constitutional Council on Monday, challenging three recent legislative measures affecting the judiciary.
First, they appealed against a law passed on Nov. 28 "extending" the mandate of five Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) members, whose terms had expired a month and a half earlier.
The second appeal challenges a law concerning the appointment of the Acting Attorney General at the Cassation Prosecutor's Office, Judge Jamal Al-Hajjar, as vice president by SJC. According to the MPS, such positions can only be held by an officially appointed prosecutor. Third, they appealed against the postponement of the retirement age — for a six-month period — of magistrates who reached the legal age of 68 between March 15, 2025, and May 15, 2026.
The invalidation appeal was filed by 11 MPs — Halimeh Kaakour, Elias Jaradeh, Michel Doueihy, Cynthia Zarazir, Mark Daou, Adib Abdel Massih, Bilal Heshaimeh, Nabil Badre, Charbel Massaad, Fouad Makhzoumi and Imad al-Hout — following studies published in Beirut-based nonprofit research and advocacy organization, Legal Agenda, and the Judges’ Club.
‘A law passed secretly’
In front of the headquarters of the Constitutional Council in Hadath, Kaakour described the law as “customized,” adding that it benefited certain judges at the expense of others. Jaradeh asserted that the new law “undermined the State and justice,” while Daou criticized its approval stating it was done “secretly, despite the strong protests” at the plenary session.
The day after the vote, the Judges' Club unsuccessfully urged the caretaker government to withhold promulgation of the law. “We had communicated the grounds for invalidity to the cabinet, which, due to the presidential vacancy, could exercise his prerogative to send the law back to the Parliament for further consideration,” Najat Abou Chacra, President of the Judges' Club, told L'Orient Le-Jour.
“However, the government decided to publish it in the Official Gazette during its meeting on Dec. 4.” On Dec. 2, Souheil Abboud, SJC president, issued a statement sharply criticizing the new law.
Executive Director of the Legal Agenda, Nizar Saghiyeh, told us that the suggested mandate extension of SJC members had been submitted by Amal movement MP Ali Hassan Khalil, before Oct. 14. The mandates hadn’t expired then. However, it was not submitted to the Parliament until it convened on Nov.28. “So this is not an extension, but a new designation,” he noted.
Abou Chacra described this “designation” as an attack on the principle of separation of powers. “Four out of the five judges concerned — Dany Chebli, Mireille Haddad, Habib Mezher and Elias Richa — had been appointed by the executive power for a three-year period, based on a proposal by the justice minister,” she said.
She then explained that renewing mandates by the legislative power was “contrary to the Constitution.”
“As for the fifth SJC member, Afif Hakim, he was elected by his peers. By renewing his mandate, the Parliament has also violated the principle of separation of powers from the judiciary,” noted Abou Chacra.
‘Not even at the request of 50 deputies’
As for Hajjar's appointment at the HJC, Abou Chacra pointed out that, according to the law, “a judge appointed to the position of the public prosecutor by a provisional measure of the HJC president cannot be a member of this body, let alone hold the position of vice president.”
Last February, in the absence of judicial appointments, Hajjar was appointed Acting Attorney General at the Cassation Prosecutor's Office by Abboud, to fill the vacancy after Ghassan Owaidat’s retirement. According to Abou Chacra, “Only a cassation prosecutor, appointed by a two-thirds majority of the government, can be an SJC member.”
Addressing the extension of the retirement age for magistrates turning 68 between March 15, 2025, and May 15, 2026, Saghiyeh said that “a first version of the law provided that the period would end on March 15, 2026, to allow Financial Prosecutor General Ali Ibrahim to benefit from this extension, as he will be retiring April 2025.”
“Jamal Hajjar's retirement is scheduled for April 2026, the text was subsequently amended to this effect,” he said. Saghiyeh noted that the head of state litigation, Helene Iskandar, who will turn 68 next January, is excluded from the extension. He therefore questioned “the reasons for setting the date at March 15, 2024, rather than Dec. 4, 2024, when the law came into force.
“The law is customized for specific magistrates, who are close to the political class,” he said. According to a judicial source, Iskandar was facing political and judicial obstacles that prevented her from becoming more involved in the cases of former Banque du Liban (BDL) governor Riad Salameh, in Lebanon, as she sought to defend the State’s interests. Iskandar is also involved “in the proceedings initiated in France against Salemeh,” added Saghiyeh.
Saghieh asserted that the retirement age extension “had not been read or debated before the plenary assembly.” More generally, the lawyer pointed out the formal flaws in the law as a whole. It "had not been sent to the SJC for its opinion,” he said. According to him, the law was not voted on by “a roll call of the members present.”
In this regard, more than five MPs asked Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to hold a new voting round, but he refused, according to the appeal copy viewed by our publication. According to the appeal, when MP Paula Yacoubian pointed out the number of protesters, he replied: “I won't start the vote again, even if 50 MPs ask me to do so.”
This article was originally published in French in L'Orient Le-Jour.
