Aoun Urges Mustaqbal Bloc against Boycotting Joint Parliamentary Committees Meeting
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun hoped on Tuesday that the joint parliamentary committees meeting on Wednesday would succeed in its mission, saying that his ministers will not boycott any of its meetings.
He urged the Mustaqbal bloc against boycotting the meetings, asking: “Are you simply acting as Sunnis or shouldn't you act as lawmakers as well?”
He made his remarks after the Change and Reform bloc's weekly meeting at Rabiyeh.
“If the Mustaqbal bloc wants to act as a Sunni bloc, then it is free to boycott the committees meeting,” continued Aoun.
“If they want to act as lawmakers, then they should head to parliament and commit to the decision of the majority,” he stressed.
“The Mustaqbal bloc believes that its boycott will prevent the committees from approving a new electoral law, but they are mistaken. Its absence will not affect the discussions because a new law does not require consensus,” noted the MP.
He accused the bloc of repeatedly obstructing government work, stating that the FPM “had only once obstructed government activity” as did Speaker Nabih Berri when he suspended parliament when the other camp wanted to approve an unconstitutional draft law.
Moreover, Aoun said: “We will accept any electoral law that ensures the election of 64 Christian MPs.”
In addition, he rejected criticism that the Orthodox Gathering proposal fuels sectarianism in Lebanon, saying that such claims are not based on experience.
“Competition during the parliamentary elections, should this proposal be adopted, will take place between candidates of the same sect,” explained the FPM leader.
The joint parliamentary committees are scheduled to meet on Wednesday in order to address the electoral subcommittee report on recent discussions over a new electoral law.
The Mustaqbal bloc had said that it may boycott the session if government representatives are present.
The March 14-led opposition had announced its boycott of government-related work in light of the assassination of Internal Security Forces Intelligence Bureau chief Brigadier General Wissam al-Hasan on October 19.
It accused Syria of being behind the crime and the government of covering up for the criminals.
Despite the boycott, the Phalange Party and Lebanese Forces announced that they will take part in the committees meetings in order to ensure that an agreement is reached over an electoral law and consequently guarantee that the elections, set for June, will be held on time.
-
29 January 2013, 17:22
Aoun on recent Russian statements on Syrian President Assad: His fate remains linked to that of his people, not Russia.
-
29 January 2013, 17:21
Aoun: We will accept any law that ensures the election of 64 Christian MPs.
-
29 January 2013, 17:21
Aoun: We will not be deceived and we will remain true to our positions.
-
29 January 2013, 17:19
Aoun: The Mustaqbal bloc must decided whether it is part of the parliament or not. We only once boycotted parliament.
-
29 January 2013, 17:19
Aoun: The Mustaqbal bloc's boycott will not obstruct the approval of a new law.
-
29 January 2013, 17:19
Aoun: The Mustaqbal bloc are either Sunnis or MPs. They can boycott government work based on their Sunni affiliations, but attributing their boycott to political reasons is rejected.
-
29 January 2013, 17:17
Aoun on civil marriage and Mufti Qabbani's rejection of the union: This issue concerns the Sunni sect.
-
29 January 2013, 17:17
Aoun: We hope that the joint parliamentary committees will be successful in their mission. Our ministers will be present at Wednesday's meeting.
-
29 January 2013, 17:13
Aoun: The competition during the elections will take place between candidates of the same sect.
-
29 January 2013, 17:12
Aoun on electoral law: They said that the Orthodox Gathering law fuels sectarianism. Such claims are not based on facts or experience.
-
29 January 2013, 17:10
FPM leader MP Michel Aoun after Change and Reform bloc's weekly meeting: We thank Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah for his efforts in containing the repercussions of the Wata al-Joz crime.
29 January 2013, 17:14
57
It's comedy time. One of the three stooges is on the wires while the other two, Sayyed and Bashar, having a pillow fight.
29 January 2013, 17:47
35
"They said that the Orthodox Gathering law fuels sectarianism. Such claims are not based on facts or experience."
So a law that forces the individual to vote only for members of his or her own sect, and a law that forces MPs to represent members of his or her own sect, is not sectarian? How illogic is that?
29 January 2013, 19:44
12
@mowaten,
"The fact that Lebanon is sectarian cannot be denied". But if we recognize that this is a problem, shouldn't we work against it rather than exacerbate it? You cannot advocate for a law based on how bad the 1960 law is. The fact that the 1960 law is bad doesn't make the Orthodox Law any better.
Sure each community is more recognized, but is this the type of government we seek? Where MPs only have the incentive to work for people of their own sect, rather than the whole of Lebanon?
We need a law that gives incentives to MPs to work and represent all of Lebanon, not just representation of sects. Both the 1960 law and the Orthodox Law fail to do that.
29 January 2013, 20:37
02
@mowaten
Of course, the full composition of the Senate and the details must be worked out. On that front, I invite you to read Professor Elias Muhanna's paper on the creation of a Lebanese Senate (I think you'd find it interesting).
Ideally, I think we could have a Senate who's law is based on the Orthodox Law, and a lower Parliament who's electoral law is based on a pure PR system with no sectarian quotas.
If such a system would work effectively in combating corruption and excessive government spending, then consider the extra expenses of creating a Senate as an investment to the future of Lebanon, and a bridge to full secularism.
29 January 2013, 22:09
12
@flamethrower
Again, you are trying to justify the Orthodox Law by pointing out the flaws in the 1960 law. I have already said the 1960 law is bad, so why exactly do you claim I am not willing to see that side?
I am in agreement with you that the 1960 law is bad, and neither do I believe that Jumblatt and Mustaqbal reject the Orthodox Law because they believe in the noble cause of secularism - they are simply looking out for their own political interests, and I agree with you on that front.
My problem is with the Orthodox Law specifically. Yes, the 1960 law has problems, but the Orthodox Law has many problems as well. Saying that there is no practical alternative (there is) and justifying the law based on the flaws of the 1960 law aren't very strong arguments.
29 January 2013, 18:00
21
Aoun: "We thank Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah for his efforts in containing the repercussions of the Wata al-Joz crime."
So you deduced it was a "crime" was it, I guess you're not waiting on the verdicts of the courts.
There shouldn't have been repercussions in the first place numbnut, it was an individual incident and the fact that neither you or your area's MPs didn't say anything about how the residents of Lassa blew it out of proportions shows how attached your pucker is to Hassin's fat ass. The incidents shows again that the Shiites of Lassa are just thugs as illustrated by their filthy towelhead threats to the Christians community that protected them all those years during the war, shame.
29 January 2013, 18:26
28
Any law that does not treat me as a Lebanese and wants to treat me as per my secte (not even my confession) is a step backwards towards abolishing sectarianism.
29 January 2013, 19:46
02
@mowaten
Just because we can't go full secularism, doesn't mean we have to go for sectarian. There are alternative where a compromise can be made (creation of a Senate), but these alternatives are being completely disregarded in favor of a pure sectarian law (Orthodox Law)
30 January 2013, 04:57
21
on the senate and sectarian laws:
- instead of always calling for dialogue conference, rather call for the senate. the senate should be there to represent the sects and religions. starting by creating the senate helps reduce sectarianism in the parliament.
- a non sectarian parliament is the target we should all look for. but to even consider accepting going backwards to more sectarian laws is just falling into the hand of those creating sectarianism.
laws are passed to deal with the future and not the present.
what is the Lebanon we want?
29 January 2013, 18:26
26
Any law that does not treat me as a Lebanese and wants to treat me as per my secte (not even my confession) is a step backwards towards abolishing sectarianism.
29 January 2013, 18:47
23
Aoun said: “If the Mustaqbal bloc wants to act as a Sunni bloc, then it is free to boycott the committees meeting,”
“If they want to act as lawmakers, then they should head to parliament and commit to the decision of the majority,” he stressed.
This comes from a person who, himself wishes to act as the leader of a Christian bloc, not as a political party. And his stating that others should commit to the decision of the majority when he is part of a bloc that boycotts, obstructs and sits in the street when the majority is not with him. He continuously attributes to others his own worst attributes. The fact that he does so without much forethought or comprehension of the patent hypocracy of his statements serve as signs of his growing mental dementia. That is, he is not someone who should be listened to by serious people.
29 January 2013, 19:38
00
the rightfull representation of christians is the problem not the the electoral law
any law that gives the christians their right is welcomed
god bless lebanon
29 January 2013, 20:59
12
why did he boycott the parliament for more than a year and prevented the gvt to do any reforms at the time? and now he is barking over the boycott of others?
pityful man....
29 January 2013, 21:49
11
You "only once boycotted parliament"??? It lasted 18 months because Nabih Berri locked parliament down!
How stupid and ignorant do u think the Lebanese people are? Not everyone is a blind aouni and hezbollahi!!!
29 January 2013, 23:16
02
FT,
I had some support for FPM precisely because of their support for secularism. But to me I am not seeing them work hard enough towards that goal, which is especially obvious by proposing a law that is as sectarian a law could be (Orthodox Law). It has caught me by surprise and I am deeply disappointed.
You believe that there are very little practical alternatives, whereas I believe there are. Simply settling for a really bad law as the FPM has done is what disappointed me, and in my eyes it has stooped down to the level of other sectarian parties such as LF and Kataeb.
I should also repeat that I am extremely against the 1960 law as well.
29 January 2013, 23:54
11
"i smell a trap closing on christians," typical sectarian sentence...
christians have half the parliament for 35% of the population! whereas muslims have the half for 65% of the population... speaking of unfairness! typical lebanese christian victimization syndrom that we ve heard for decades and decades once again a proof of how sectarian they are and the urge for a secular state!
29 January 2013, 23:18
02
FT,
You would be quite surprised to find out that a large number of Lebanese do not support our sectarian political system. We only need a new party or movement that fights for secularism in order for its supporters to vote for them.
Look up the movement "Take Back Parliament" (www.vote2013.org). These are the parties that we need to start giving more attention to.
29 January 2013, 23:21
02
FT,
Thus when you say that Lebanon, whether we like it or not, is sectarian in nature, I disagree. The sectarianism that lives is the consequence of our political system. In other words, our political system isn't sectarian because the population is sectarian; it is the opposite, our people our sectarian because the political system is sectarian.
Poll after poll shows that more and more Lebanese are in support in abolishing a confessional system, so I strongly disagree with you when you say Lebanon is a sectarian country. But so long as political parties are only looking and speaking out for their own sectarian interests (as the FPM has done along with other major Christian parties), the people that support a secular state are silenced and marginalized.
30 January 2013, 00:11
11
FT talking about secularism while supporting a sectarian leader, big laugh!!!!
29 January 2013, 23:24
11
what a stupid logic FPMers have...FPM is "secular"? LOL... they propose a sectarian law which shows how "secular" they are...
if FPM was a true responsible party willing to change things as they boast, they wouldn t propose a sectarian law!
a responsible leader is the one who proposes a vision for a society , a change, not maintaining its flaws and fighting to keep his sectarian privileges...
they say they are "secular" but all aoun always does is defend the rights of christians, says he is the leader of christians and so on! all his speeches are sectarian!
if he was really thinking of the interest of LEBANESE not his sect he would set an example of secularism not clinging to his interests just to win the elections....
but twisted sheep folowers pretend he is secular! what a farce....
30 January 2013, 05:02
20
people like you are the reason salafism is increasing. they see your sectarian rhetoric and they radicalize.
