| 4 December 2021, Saturday |

“Pandora” documents .. Where does accounting begin?

The disclosure of the “Pandora Documents” raises the importance of having international accounting systems if the systems within each country fail to hold those involved in tax smuggling accountable as it falls under the issue of corruption, according to international diplomatic sources.

International diplomatic sources confirm to “Sawt Beirut International”, that there is no strong and organized international system for sanctions in this area. It is up to each country, its accountability system, the level of pressures posed by public opinion, and the official reaction to that, including the accountability carried out by the media and the judiciary.

The sources indicate that the United Nations does not control the world in everything, especially with matters related to corruption, unless cases of illegal, mafia or terrorist financing, or money laundering are proven. Even if proven, it does not have the executive authority to punish or the mechanism to arrest the accused.

Moreover, there is no international accountability in terms of interference in the internal accounting institutions of countries. In addition, the sovereign orientation of each concerned country impedes international intervention or interference by the United Nations, the largest organization.

And therefore, internationally, there is no special court for these acts that transcend sovereignty, unless there are international issues covered by the texts, but it is assumed that the accountability begins in the beginning with the concerned country.

In Europe, there are strong internal institutions in the field of accounting that can reach the imprisonment of the most senior official if anything is proven against him. Although it has part of the authority to do so, it is available to the United Nations or the European Union. But in general, the Europeans have an internal judiciary where their sovereignty is not relinquished in the matter, and they have nothing about it being forbidden to target state officials.

In Lebanon, if the judiciary wants to hold those involved accountable, it is accused of targeting the honor of the sect, unless it considers that the sect will be held accountable in the beginning and then the state. In Lebanon, everything is interconnected. The question is, is there any logic in that? Will there be accountability?