What are the positions of the various blocs on the parliamentary sit-in?

The two MPs exercised their constitutional right and called all parliamentary blocs to join them.

Hours passed, and only the representatives of Saida, the Kataeb, and several Change MPs entered the parliament in solidarity with them.

But what is the position of other parliamentary blocs?

The Strong Republic Bloc (LF) considers any move to break the deadlock in the presidential file as a good step, but what is required, according to its sources, is for the opposition to agree on the name of one candidate who will receive the votes of all the opposition. When this condition is met, the representatives of the LF may join this sit-in.

The sources of the Democratic Gathering Bloc (PSP) expressed their respect for the sit-in. The Democratic Gathering considered it a democratic move to object to the situation in the presidential file. Still, according to its sources, the bloc deals with matters in other ways, such as dialogue and openness.

The sources of the Moderate Bloc (Kotlat al-Aatidal), in turn, supported the movement of the MPs and confirmed the possibility of joining the sit-in in the event of continuing to disrupt the presidential elections.

On the other hand, Hezbollah refused to comment. At the same time, Amal Movement has considered that what the MPs are doing is a constitutional right, hoping it will constitute a push toward resolving the presidential file. However, according to Amal sources, there is only one way to solve the crisis: through dialogue and openness in light of the current balance of power in the parliament.

The Strong Lebanon Bloc (FPM) indicated that the problem is not in holding the sessions but in the results of these sessions. The bloc's sources wondered what the sit-in could do within the framework of mobilizing political positions.

The sit-in is still ongoing despite the disparity in the opinions of the blocs. So will its effects succeed in bringing a personality to Baabda Palace?