Legislative debate: Decision surrounding Army Commander uncertain in the absence of a president

Months of ongoing debates between Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Christian blocs, including the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), Lebanese Forces, and the Kataeb Party, have centered on the legislative approach without a president.

With the recent discussion of extending the term of the Army Commander or postponing his demobilization through legislation passed by the parliament, the legislative topic has resurfaced in the president's absence.

The FPM, known for consistently emphasizing that no legislation for any extension or appointment should take place in the president's absence, made two exceptions.

They participated in the session for the technical extension of municipalities on April 18, 2023, and another session to approve allocations for public sector salaries on June 19, 2023. The party justified these exceptions as necessary and urgent.

Since April 2022, the Lebanese Forces maintained a firm stance, adamantly rejecting legislation in the president's absence. Their position remained unwavering until MP George Adwan provided a justification on November 13 for the Lebanese Forces accepting the principle of legislating necessity for the extension of Army Commander General Joseph Aoun's term.

On the other hand, the Kataeb Party has consistently opposed any legislation in the absolute absence of the president. They are against any party's appointment of a new Army Commander, as they believe this authority belongs exclusively to the president.

Presently, they are increasingly against any legal or constitutional interpretation allowing any appointment or extension in parliament, insisting that such decisions should come through the government.

As Thursday approaches, Lebanese citizens, having learned from past lessons will be observing closely. Those who have taken a stance and stuck to it, and those who have shifted positions, will be scrutinized, prompting questions about the reasons behind such changes.