Sunday , January 17 2021

The ambiguity surrounding the withdrawal of "military discrimination" in the case of Barghawi



Yusuf Diab wrote in the Middle East newspaper:

The decision of the military judge against the head of the Arab stream, Shaker Barghawi, was not completed in February, for a year, against the background of the armed clashes that took place in Beirut's sports city on March 23. The judge tried to lay her hand on the case and determine who was responsible for the breakthrough against the veto, Lebanese security minister Yacoub al-Saraf refused to refer the case to the investigating authority on the grounds that the military judiciary is not subject to judicial review.

The demonstrators view the decision as a political background, because in Beirut, Hezbollah is considered a Hezbollah and enjoys political and security protection. This decision did not appeal to the Public Prosecutor's Office, which by means of the Assistant Attorney General to the Military Court, Judge Mona Hanegir, appealed the ruling to the High Court of Justice, headed by Justice Tony Toph, to nullify and prosecute him, and to condemn Bergawi for criminal offenses, And the destruction of public and private property.

The military court, headed by Brig. Gen. Hussein Abdullah, ruled in absentia in February that he spent a year in prison in the context of the armed clashes that took place in the Beirut sports city on March 23, 2014. But his legal agent, Assad opposed the verdict, and he set up a hearing on October 19 and sentenced him to six million pounds.

If the moderation of the law is understood in its legal dimension, because it remains subject to the conviction of the military court, the steps determined in the judgment were not understood, according to a legal reference that corresponds to the proceedings in the case. Referring to Asharq Alawsat, it appears that the Military Court of Appeals accepted the appeal filed by the Military Prosecution and set a date for a retrial by El-Borg & Evie, but the agent of the sign submitted a letter of objection to appeal his reply. Unprecedented precedent in the history of the judiciary ". The legal authority described what happened as "procedural confusion." "This is the first time that the Court of Appeals accepted the veto decision and then repeats it," he said. He added: "We do not know the reasons that led to the flight of criminal materials in the previous trial, in order to accept the decision of the Court of Appeals, which cut the way to any possibility of veto power,

According to the legal source who follows the case, "Shaker al-Barghi" was removed from the case by a political decision and by direct pressure from Hizbollah, who transferred him to the military court after serving a one-year prison sentence and pressuring him to bring him to trial quickly within 48 hours "He said.

The procedural confusion in this case necessitates a move by the Judicial Review Committee, which requested Shakir al-Barghawi's file to examine the reasons for the suspension of the proceedings. According to a source in this case, the Government Commissioner appealed to the military court, Peter Gramnosch, "called the decision of the military court to file the case, and the court referred the case to the Ministry of Defense because it would be the military court. Judicial review, and decided not to hand over the case for examination. " "The head of the military court of military judges, the justices of the military court, the military judges and the prosecutors in the military court are all judges, so they are among the judicial bodies of the Justice Ministry and the judges are subject to judicial review authority," the source said.

The moderate regime of al-Barghawi opposed the future movement, headed by Prime Minister Sa'ad Hariri, and thought that "acquitting the accused, Shaker Barghawi, who is accused of terrorism and attempted murder and disturbance of civil peace due to the bloody events he caused in Beirut, expresses surprise at what he called" the involvement of legal entities In the military court to prepare the scenario of the return of the defendant Shaker Berg and Evie and his appearance before the court, in order to arrange and fabricate legal proceedings to declare his innocence. "He said that the future movement will not silence the crime of misrepresentation of the trial, And the military court to adopt the assets in defense And not to bow to pressures and party demands received by a party (hidden from the Hezbollah channel).


Source link