Politics, money and the judiciary are three related and contradictory files at the same time. During the past months, they formed an exceptional interest as they are related to the principle of separation of powers and respect for the law while preserving the rights of the citizens.
But it is certain that the ruling system that brought the country to what it has reached is primarily responsible for putting the citizen, the banks and the judiciary against each other in the absence of an intentional approval of “Capital Control” by the parliament.
While the banks are heading to carry out a strike today and tomorrow in protest against the judicial practices against the banking sector, it is expected that this closure will have negative repercussions at all levels, especially since the banks are an essential monetary artery for the country, and that any closure of this sector means stopping the work of the exchange platform, which will cause a scarcity of dollars in The market, which naturally leads to a rise of the dollar exchange rate on the black market, and the announcement of the bank strike caused confusion in the fuel market as well, as queues of cars lined up in front of the stations, given that companies sell fuel according to the exchange rate of the platform.
From here, attention is directed to how the judicial scene will turn towards the banking sector, especially after the cabinet session last Saturday, after which Prime Minister Najib Mikati launched positions towards the judicial authority after the rejection of the President of the Supreme Judicial Council, the Public Prosecutor and the Head of the Judicial Inspection Authority Request to summon them to the cabinet session.
judicial sources described to “Sawt Beirut International” Mikati’s words as hasty, especially regarding what he said about the possibility of dismissing some judges.
Judicial sources considered that the political authority has been seeking for years to strike the judiciary by taming some judges in favor of politicians through extortion and subjecting them to subjugate their orders and satisfy them in order to be promoted.
The sources indicate that despite this, the percentage of these judges remained small, but they gained sensitive and important judicial positions due to their political subordination, especially that the main judicial centers are distributed according to sects.
Therefore, there are some judges who are entrusted with the political authority and who have become linked to them and not to the judicial authority and violate its decisions despite the fact that The judiciary, according to Article 20 of the Constitution, is an independent, free, and sovereign authority that issues its rulings in the name of the Lebanese people.
Therefore, the political authority oversteps the judiciary and considers it subservient.
Judicial sources confirm that summoning the judicial body to a session of the Council of Ministers contradicts the principle of separation of powers, and the sources stress that judges must deal with sensitive files with a national conscience, including those related to the issue of the banking sector.
The sources do not deny that some judges take decisions and measures in sensitive files that do not rise to the level of responsibility, but according to the sources, the Judicial Council must consider these decisions, take the necessary measures, and urge the judges to implement the law without any discretion or political background or by exaggerating the issuance of judgments Within the powers granted to the judicial body.
As the sources indicate that the executive authority should have consulted with the judiciary and inquired about any file away from the media hype.
sources noted that the public prosecutor is more familiar than the minister of justice with all the details in the judiciary, so he must maintain continuous communication with both the presidents of the republic and the government to address all problems in an appropriate manner.
The sources stress that the cassation public prosecutor, being the head of public prosecutions, has a lot of powers, and he can ask any public prosecutor to abandon a file if he deems it so, and if he rejects the decision of the cassation public prosecutor, the latter can ask the judicial police not to cooperate with the first.
The sources point out that Judge Ghada Aoun is a public prosecutor who pursues criminal cases, and the procedures she took are related to the civil right regarding the lawsuit against banks and the seizure of their assets, and there is no criminal offense affecting her.
In the end, “every ruling regime must aspire to guarantee human freedom, and for that a separation of powers must be maintained and a balance between them,” said Montesquieu, the author of the theory of separation of powers three centuries ago. Is it time in Lebanon to listen to the voice of the greats?