Berri: No Session before May 15 Unless there is Consensus on Vote Law

إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية W460

Speaker Nabih Berri has rejected appeals made by rival lawmakers for a parliamentary session before May 15 over the absence of a consensual electoral draft-law.

In remarks to local newspapers published Wednesday, Berri said he can't call for such a session without having a consensual vote law on parliament's agenda.

“If I decide to call for a session now, I will only have the Orthodox Gathering proposal on the agenda for being the only plan approved by the joint parliamentary committees and referred to the general assembly,” the speaker said.

“If a session was held under such circumstances, then the political parties would bicker in no vain,” he said. “So it would be better for them to fight outside the parliament.”

The so-called Orthodox Gathering proposal considers Lebanon a single electoral district and allows each sect to vote for its own lawmakers under a proportional representation system.

Despite its adoption by the joint committees, it has been rejected by al-Mustaqbal bloc, the National Struggle Front and March 14 alliance's independent Christian MPs.

A parliamentary subcommittee that was tasked with finding an alternative to the 1960 vote law failed on Tuesday to reach consensus on a hybrid proposal made by Berri that calls for 50 percent of MPs be elected under the proportional representation system and the other half through the winner-takes-all system.

The subcommittee's chairman, MP Robert Ghanem, announced the suspension of the meetings over the “huge gap” between the rival MPs from the March 8 and March 14 alliances in addition to the centrist National Struggle Front.

But Berri criticized the suspension, saying “the subcommittee could have reached some common ground.”

He stressed that he would call for consecutive parliamentary sessions if the lawmakers failed by May 15 to reach consensus on a vote law.

But he warned that he would resort to voting on the Orthodox Gathering proposal if they failed during the sessions to agree on a draft-law because it is the only plan that was approved by the joint committees.

“Those who are dreaming of the return to the 1960 law will keep dreaming,” Berri said.

The 1960 law that considers the qada an electoral district and is based on the winner-takes-all system was used in the 2009 elections with some amendments.

But the majority of parties have rejected it for not guaranteeing a fair representation for all the Lebanese, mainly Christians.

Berri also rejected accusations that some parties were seeking to link the cabinet formation process to the agreement on the vote law.

“The formation of the government should reflect positively on the discussions to agree on the electoral law and vice versa,” he said.

But he warned that failure to agree on a vote law should not obstruct the formation of the cabinet.

Comments 3
Thumb geha 24 April 2013, 08:35

no electoral law, because fpm and hizbushaitan do not want elections where they are not sure they will win.

Thumb dasphinx 24 April 2013, 11:07

What happened to "shouhoud el zour" and "arms to defend the arms" and "no resistance weapons shall be used internally" and "our weapons are only to defend Lebanon against the ZIonist enemy" slogans? Now we have two new slogans: "we are defending the Lebanese living in Syria as well as our religious icons" and "we want either the Orthodox Law or Lebanon one district with proportionality", the latter representing the total opposites. All empty slogans with one intention: hold Lebanon hostage.

Regarding your question about what scares him about the Orthodox law, the question should have been "why are you against more divisions in Lebanon that will help Hizbollah better rule the country and further divide teh Lebanese along sectarian lines?"

Thumb dasphinx 24 April 2013, 11:02

Why is it OK for everyone to talk about Christian rights as opposed to everyone's civil rights? Are Christians super Lebanese and others are less Lebanese? I heard Gibran Bassil on TV saying that he is pushing for Christians to occupy 50% of the government's jobs. It 50/50 also applicable to job? Christians represent 35% of the population. If they have 50% of the jobs, that means that there will be no equal opportunity for the remaining 65% who will fight for 50% of the jobs.

I am getting disgusted by the sectarian talks promoted by the Christian leaders in general and Aoun & Co in particular, all to serve their elections agenda but at the end widening the socio-economic wedge between the Lebanese.

We will never become a modern country with medieval mentality.