According to what diplomatic sources closely following the issue have told ‘Sawt Beirut International’, that Third-class diplomats, who were included in the recent formations, have begun to file appeals before the State Council regarding the legality of these formations for the following reasons:
1- The individuals responsible for the formations did not consider the opinion of the administrative committee at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, nor did they seek the opinion of the Directorate of Administrative Affairs on the matter.
2- The files of the diplomats involved in the formations were not sent to the Civil Service Council to express their opinion. Especially since these files may have been updated concerning penalties, commendations, additional academic certificates, or other matters. The Civil Service Council is responsible for evaluating diplomats before the formations are made.
3- The formations implemented a purely sectarian criterion at the expense of any other standard. Competence was compromised in favor of sectarianism. It should be noted that only the first category is subject to sectarian criteria, not the second and third categories. As a result, three-quarters of the Maronite diplomats were returned to administration without any Sunni diplomat being reassigned, while all Shiite and Druze diplomats were reassigned.
Furthermore, it was not taken into account that certain embassies require diplomats with specific expertise, especially in major capitals. This is a major reason for the appeals, in the hope that they will be promptly addressed.
Additionally, the opinion of the diplomatic mission’s head abroad regarding the formations was not considered.”
“Moreover, these formations took place in the history of the Foreign Ministry in the absence of the President of the Republic and under a caretaker government. Vacancies resulting from leaves were usually filled temporarily based on the leaves of diplomats working abroad. This contributed to improving the financial situation of diplomats who spent more than two years in Beirut due to the delay in formations.
The criterion of seven years of service abroad was completely disregarded. Diplomats build their financial details and family life around this criterion. In the first three years of their appointment, diplomats accumulate debts due to purchasing a car, furnishing their homes, and relocating their family’s needs to their workplace. They strive to save some of their income after paying off their debts after the fourth year, in order to maintain a decent life for their family upon returning to the central administration.”
According to the sources, some ambassadors from the first category continue to work despite the law stipulating their mission abroad for ten years. This is due to the failure to form new ambassadorial appointments before the vacancy in the position of the President of the Republic. It becomes impossible to carry out formations for both the first and second categories in the absence of the President of the Republic and a Council of Ministers representing all government components.