Search
Search

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE LAW

What’s behind Adwan's ‘boycotting’ Nassar?

Several parties asked whether the MP’s persistent refusal to invite the minister to the Committee on Administration and Justice, which he chairs, is politically motivated.

What’s behind Adwan's ‘boycotting’ Nassar?

Georges Adwan, Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee for Administration and Justice, and Adel Nassar, Justice Minister. (Credit: National News Agency)

The reasons behind the sharp dispute between the Parliamentary Committee on Administration and Justice chairman Georges Adwan and Justice Minister Adel Nassar remain unclear. However, some parties believe the motives are political. 

This dispute was ignited against the backdrop of a rivalry over authorship of the draft law on judicial independence, which will soon be put to a vote.

The dispute came to light when Adwan failed to invite the minister to the June 3 session, held to discuss the draft law. 

Speaking in a rather sharp tone on “Sar El Waet” talk show, broadcast on the local MTV channel on June 12, he said that the draft, which was adopted by the Cabinet on May 2 and submitted to the committee, is the result of “10,000 hours” of work by MPs that culminated in the draft law presented in 2023.

Media law update

Moussawi pleads for 'responsible freedom' during discussions about new media law

This contrasts, he added, to the “40 hours” of work, referring to the efforts led by Nassar and carried out by various judicial and civil organizations, based on the recommendations of the Venice Commission and the Justice Forum.

In a live response to these remarks, Nassar noted, in a more measured tone, that the draft law is the result of a “collaborative” effort that is not driven by a logic of “competition,” but by collaboration with the parliamentary committee, judicial institutions, legal experts and civil society.

This acknowledgment of “the joint efforts” made did not, however, prevent Adwan from refraining from inviting the justice minister to the committee session held on Tuesday, five days after their exchange on TV. 

Read more

Nassar rules out resignation

Speaking to L’Orient-Le Jour, a source close to Nassar questioned why the MP had changed his position, given that he initially supported the cabinet’s approach. When the Cabinet adopted the draft law, Adwan publicly welcomed it on X, the source said, and noted that the text had been drafted “in coordination” with him. 

The same source added that the two men met “on three occasions” and spoke “several times” by phone about this topic.

At the MP’s request, the minister had sent him a comparative table outlining the differences between the draft law and the proposed amendments to 35 articles, before submitting the draft to the Cabinet, the source said. It stressed that the work was carried out “jointly.”

It seems that Adwan wants the credit to be attributed exclusively to the parliamentary committee, said the same source, who accused him of “delaying, or even bypassing, the legislative process.”

Read more

Nominating a future prosecutor for financial crimes at the center of a standoff between Nassar and Berri

The source added that the MP hopes that the judicial appointments will be on hold until the law is voted on. 

However, the swift enactment of the law remains a priority for the minister, the source said, and emphasized that he does not wish to engage in controversies that fall short of the significance of “the issue concerning the general interest of the Lebanese people.”

‘Plagiarism’

L’Orient-Le Jour attempted to contact Adwan and committee member Georges Okais (also a member of the Lebanese Forces), but to no avail.

One of the 18 committee members told L’Orient-Le Jour on condition of anonymity that Adwan considers the draft law to be “plagiarism” of the draft he has been working on “for years.”

According to this MP, the head of the parliamentary committee was displeased that the version he received from the Cabinet came in the form of a complete draft law rather than as a series of comments on the original proposal.

Another committee member sees the dispute as focused on form rather than substance, which he deemed “inappropriate,” given the “crucial importance” of reforming the judicial sector. 

Without providing a clear answer, a third MP, also a committee member, wondered whether the dispute between the two men is driven by Adwan’s “ego” or conceals political motives. 

In this regard, the MP recalled the “very good relations” between Adwan and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who is currently engaged in a showdown with the minister over the appointment of the prosecutor general for financial crimes. Berri exclusively supports Judge Zaher Hamadeh for this position, a choice to which Nassar is firmly opposed. 

The MP asked whether or not Adwan’s stance reflects a defense of Berri’s position. 

This is false, said a source from the Lebanese Forces (LF), who stated that the party also opposes the appointment of Hamadeh.

‘Childish quarrel’

Speaking to L’Orient-Le Jour, Nizar Saghieh, director of Legal Agenda and a member of the Coalition for the Independence of the Judiciary — two platforms consulted, among others, by Nassar to amend the draft law — said he does not know the motives behind Adwan’s “boycott” of the minister. However, he does not rule out “political considerations.”

“This boycott goes against the constitutional principle of cooperation between public authorities,” said Saghieh. He added that, during the latest meeting of the parliamentary committee, Adwan informed the attending MPs that he would not reverse his decision to exclude the minister from the discussions on the draft law.

L’Orient-Le Jour learned that, during that meeting, an MP pointed out to the committee chairman that the text currently under discussion is not solely the original draft law, but also includes the version submitted by the cabinet. This was the MP’s way of pointing to the recognition of the minister’s institutional legitimacy, thereby making the minister's exclusion unjustified.

Adwan ignored this objection. Saghieh noted, in this regard, that Adwan’s stance contradicts Article 31 of the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, which grants the prerogative of inviting a third party to the committee’s meetings to the entire committee, not solely to its president.

“In any case, after all the efforts made by the various stakeholders, no one can claim to be the sole author of this text. Fighting to claim its authorship is childish,” Saghieh said.

This article was translated from L'Orient-Le Jour by Joelle El Khoury.

The reasons behind the sharp dispute between the Parliamentary Committee on Administration and Justice chairman Georges Adwan and Justice Minister Adel Nassar remain unclear. However, some parties believe the motives are political. This dispute was ignited against the backdrop of a rivalry over authorship of the draft law on judicial independence, which will soon be put to a vote.The dispute came to light when Adwan failed to invite the minister to the June 3 session, held to discuss the draft law. Speaking in a rather sharp tone on “Sar El Waet” talk show, broadcast on the local MTV channel on June 12, he said that the draft, which was adopted by the Cabinet on May 2 and submitted to the committee, is the result of “10,000 hours” of work by MPs that culminated in the draft law presented in 2023. Media law update Moussawi...
Comments (0) Comment

Comments (0)

Back to top