No agreements were made with the Banque du Liban regarding the decision issued by it

0
16


The following explanatory statement was issued by the head of the State Shura Council, Judge Fadi Elias:
The head of the State Consultative Council clarifies that “the meeting that took place in the Presidential Palace was in the wake of the events that took place on the street following the issuance of the State Consultative Council’s decision to stop the implementation of Banque du Liban Circular No. 151. The State is a legal person who is the source of establishing and activating public utilities of all kinds. It performs its duties in the public interest. As the people of public law are governed by common general rules and they need to continue dealing with each other in order to run the affairs of the state, without neglecting the oversight that the administrative judiciary conducts on the work of the public administration.

In this context, the Speaker of the State Consultative Council regrets the systematic campaigns in the media that targeted him and violated his dignity and his morals in an unjustified bid for the independence of the judiciary and the judge’s impartiality and impartiality with what it considered “the judge’s sitting with one of the opponents.”
Those who launched these positions do not know the specificity of the administrative judiciary and the difference between the rules that regulate the litigation procedures between both the administrative and the judicial sides, especially those related to the claim of invalidation for exceeding the limit of authority.

In this regard, we make it clear that the lawsuit filed before the State Consultative Council aimed at stopping the implementation and subsequently invalidating Banque du Liban Circular No. 151 for violating the law in general, is by its nature not aimed at protecting personal rights or interests in and of itself, and therefore it is objective and not personal. Or subjectivity, and its purpose is to protect the legitimacy, which requires the administration, when issuing its decisions, to take into account the rules of the law, and to take into account the purpose that the law envisages in issuing the decision, which is to achieve the public interest, so as not to deviate from it or offend it.
Based on this, the annulment lawsuit is directed against the behavior of the administration that issued the illegal decision and not against a specific person, specifically the person who issued the decision, because the lesson is for the contested decision and not for the person who issued it, as it is not based on a dispute between opponents, given that the culprit is the administrative decision, not the person The official in the administration that issued this decision.
This independence does not prevent communication and cooperation between the Council and the rest of the public law persons within the frameworks and limits drawn by the law to run the work of the state, and it is not hidden from mind that the Council plays an advisory role based on Article 57 of its system, which requires consulting in draft regulatory texts.
In this context, it must be pointed out that the head of the State Council presides over the Administrative Chamber and the First Chamber that deals with nullification cases, and therefore the source of any administrative decision (minister, general manager, governor of the Banque du Liban…) can be challenged before the chamber. At the same time, he can submit a request for advice from the Administrative Chamber regarding any other administrative decision he wants to issue without resulting in any antagonistic litigation that prevents him from giving him the required advice.
In line with the principle of flexible separation “between the authorities, their balance and their cooperation” enshrined in paragraph (e) of the preamble to the Lebanese Constitution, there is no conflict between the advisory mission of the State Consultative Council in Lebanon and the principle of separation of powers, as its administrative, legislative and judicial tasks constitute a guarantee For balance and cooperation between the three authorities in the state, through the prior control exercised by the State Consultative Council over draft legislative and regulatory texts, and the subsequent control exercised by it through nullification lawsuits.
What the President of the State Consultative Council is interested in clarifying regarding the meeting that took place in the Republican Palace is the following:
During the meeting, the President of the Council presented that the circular issued by the Banque du Liban contradicts some provisions of the Money and Credit Law, which necessitated the issuance of a decision to stop its implementation. He also clarified that Article 57 of the State Consultative Council system requires the council to be consulted on draft regulatory texts, including decisions issued by the Governor of the Banque du Liban. As for the implementation of the judicial decisions issued by the Council, the Speaker of the Council made it clear that there are special assets specified by law in Article 126 of the State Consultative Council system that require that requests for the implementation of decisions issued against the administrative authority be submitted to the Chairman of the State Consultative Council, who transmits them without delay along with the copy valid for implementation to Competent references to take action. Emphasizing that what the Chairman of the Council explained was based on the mentioned legal texts and ended at this point.
After what was presented above, the head of the State Consultative Council confirms that, contrary to what has been circulated in some circles, no agreements have been made between the State Consultative Council and the Banque du Liban regarding the decision issued by it, and that all the gossip that has been raised in this regard is a figment of the imagination of its launchers and is far from everything. On the reality and the truth and the possibility of legal realization in the presence of a governing body composed of three judges, it is impossible, in any way, to imagine that the president would reduce them to his person.
There is no doubt that what the country has stirred up about on this issue is aimed at undermining the prestige of the judiciary and people’s trust in it, and dragging the country into absurdity, chaos and decadence.
May God protect Lebanon from ignorance and bad faith.





LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here