Hizbollah’s plans are unclear after minister’s release
The release of the former Lebanese minister Michel Samaha from prison last week caused widespread outrage in Lebanon. It also showed that the military justice system that put him on trial was open to outside influence. Mr Samaha’s fate may affect the future leeway of courts to be swayed by political forces.
He was arrested in 2012 after he was caught on video instructing Milad Kfoury to plant bombs that Mr Samaha had brought back in his car from Syria. The bombs were destined to target civilians and political figures opposed to Damascus and to heighten sectarian tensions in Lebanon. What Mr Samaha did not know was that Mr Kfoury was working for Lebanon’s internal security forces, and that he was being recorded.
Later, under interrogation, Mr Samaha admitted all, saying that a senior Syrian intelligence chief, Ali Mamlouk, had asked him to carry the bombs back to Lebanon and organise where they were to be used.
In recent days, amid anger with Mr Samaha’s release, the video of the interrogation has been leaked to the media. There is no doubt that the former minister is guilty.
The role of the military tribunal has provoked controversy. Normally, the tribunal exists only to deal with cases involving military personnel, but in recent decades its powers have expanded to cover such things as terrorism cases. The justice minister, Ashraf Rifi , now seeks to dissolve the tribunal, or at least curb its powers. He also seeks to transfer the Samaha case to the Judicial Council, a court that deals with state security cases. What bothers Mr Rifi and his political allies is that Hizbollah has undue influence over the Lebanese army – and therefore, they believe over the military tribunal. Indeed, this was visible last year when the tribunal sentenced Mr Samaha to just four and a half years in prison. The leniency of the sentence provoked such a furore that the military court of cassation nullified it and ordered a retrial. Mr Samaha may have been freed but he was in no way declared innocent and will have to go through a retrial. While, legally, he was entitled to be freed on bail, the military tribunal has often rejected similar requests by individuals accused of lesser crimes. This suggested that political intervention may have secured his release. To say that Lebanon is sharply divided over Mr Samaha’s liberation is exaggerated. Even some of his political allies are embarrassed by him. One of them, Jamil Al Sayyed, a former head of the General Security Directorate who was detained in 2005 on suspicion of involvement in the assassination of Rafiq Hariri, said publicly that he had broken with Mr Samaha. Tammam Salam called for a speedy retrial and made perhaps the most pertinent point, warning what impunity for Mr Samaha could imply for Lebanon’s security.
He declared: “It’s a case linked to the national security of a country that is still engaged in a battle with various forms of terrorism that target its stability, social fabric and democratic principles.”
Indeed, it is diffi cult for the authorities to allow Mr Samaha to walk free for long when Lebanon’s security services are engaged in a daily battle against extremists who have set off bombs in civilian areas. Why arrest suspected bombers on the one side only to release avowed bombers on the other?
Many are watching if Mr Rifi will succeed in dissolving or limiting the military tribunal. This will be no easy task. Hizbollah will probably oppose it, and given its political alliances may succeed in blocking Mr Rifi’s efforts in the cabinet. The outcome may be determined by the fluid political situation in Lebanon. The recent decision of the Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea to endorse his erstwhile rival Michel Aoun for the presidency has turned the system on its head. Mr Aoun had routinely backed Hizbollah’s priorities, assuming that doing so would push the party to support his presidential ambitions.
Yet today Hizbollah’s intentions are unclear. Officially the party’s presidential candidate remains Mr Aoun, but some believe this was only an excuse to deadlock the system and maintain a political void to the benefit of Hizbollah. If the party perpetuates the void by failing to fully back Mr Aoun, Hizbollah could lose Mr Aoun’s support in the government.
This would facilitate Mr Rifi ’ s efforts to secure a majority to limit the powers of the military tribunal. In the meantime, however, a large chunk of the political class is raising the heat to ensure that when Mr Samaha returns to court, his chances of receiving a light sentence disappear.
After five years of carnage in Syria, no one doubts the Assad regime’s willingness to encourage its allies to kill. But Mr Samaha’s experience is beyond the pale. Hizbollah may have helped him as a favour to Damascus, but ultimately, keeping him in prison may be less trouble than freeing him, where he will be a constant reminder of the criminal ways of those who were behind him.