Ukrainian MPs vote to end independence of anti-corruption agencies
Despite widespread criticism from NGOs and rights groups, parliament voted 263 in favour and 13 against to place the two government anti-corruption agencies under the direct authority of the prosecutor-general, who the president appoints.
AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
LBCI
20 hours ago
- LBCI
Statement from MP George Bouchikian's media office criticizes parliamentary session for denying defense opportunity
The media office of former minister and MP George Bouchikian issued a statement expressing strong criticism of the recent parliamentary session concerning the request to lift his immunity. The statement highlighted that Bouchikian's defense lawyer was officially notified on July 21, 2025, to appear before the Parliament's general assembly to present a legal defense by constitutional rights and international laws. The lawyer arrived fully prepared to challenge the request and address its legal and constitutional shortcomings. However, the statement condemned the Parliament for proceeding directly to a vote after reading the request, without allowing the defense lawyer to present his plea. This move was described as a serious breach of justice and a violation of the right to defense, casting doubt on the legitimacy of the session. The statement also pointed out that, in the same session, lawyers representing the former telecommunications ministers involved in a separate case were allowed to plead before the assembly, highlighting what it called a clear double standard and inequality before the law. The media office emphasized that this was not merely a procedural error. Still, a dangerous precedent, and promised to address the issue in detail later to uphold justice, dignity, and respect for the constitution and the law.
L'Orient-Le Jour
21 hours ago
- L'Orient-Le Jour
Hacking Lebanese Politics #17: Parliamentary immunity in Lebanon explained
In a rare move, Parliament voted on Wednesday to lift the immunity of MP and former Industry Minister Georges Bouchikian, with 99 MPs voting in favor. Bouchikian stands accused of accepting bribes during his tenure as industry minister under Najib Mikati's government. The session, called by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, also featured hearings from former Telecom ministers Boutros Harb, Nicolas Sehnawi and Jamal Jarrah, who are also implicated in a major corruption case. Will this set a precedent? Could top officials finally be held accountable? For now, nothing is certain, but this vote marks a rare breakthrough in a country where Parliament almost never lifts the protections of its own members. So, what is parliamentary immunity? Why has it become a political bargaining chip? And what does it mean when Parliament itself controls who can be prosecuted? Let's break it down. 1. What is parliamentary immunity in Lebanon? In Lebanon, parliamentary immunity is defined in Article 40 of the Constitution, giving MPs legal privileges that set them apart from ordinary citizens. Article 27 establishes that an MP represents the entire nation and cannot be bound by conditions from their voters. This means MPs hold a representative mandate, allowing them to prioritize the public interest, even if it conflicts with the demands of their constituency. In practice, however, Lebanon's weak party system often pushes MPs to focus narrowly on their district and sectarian base. Why immunity exists: The goal of immunity is to guarantee that MPs can express opinions and fulfill their duties without fear of legal or political harassment. In Lebanon, the Constitution and parliamentary rules distinguish two main types of immunity: 1.) Absolute immunity (non-liability): Defined by Article 39, this shields MPs from any legal action for opinions, statements or votes expressed during their term, even after it ends. This protection extends to both oral and written statements — even those that might be defamatory or controversial — as long as they are related to parliamentary duties. However, if an MP's remarks or actions involve personal attacks or are unrelated to their official duties, this protection can be challenged. 2.) Personal immunity (inviolability): Defined by Article 40, this prevents MPs from facing criminal prosecution or arrest during parliamentary sessions without Parliament's prior approval, except in cases of ' jurm mashhoud ' (being caught in the act). Outside parliamentary sessions, MPs can in theory be prosecuted, but political custom authorities still seek Parliament's approval, making this protection a powerful political shield. 2 - Who is under scrutiny this week, and why? The current cases show how immunity can shield MPs from serious financial crimes that have little to do with legislative work: Georges Bouchikian: Former Industry Minister (2021–2025) and current MP for Zahle (Tachnag). He is accused of embezzlement and forgery. Prosecutor general Jamal Hajjar requested lifting his immunity on July 8, two days after Bouchikian left Lebanon for what he calls a 'long-planned family trip.' He denies the charges and says he will cooperate with the judiciary. On July 23, Parliament voted to lift his immunity with 99 votes in favor, while MP Jamil al-Sayyed abstained. Telecom ministers: Boutros Harb (2014–2016), Nicolas Sehnaoui (2011–2014), and Jamal Jarrah (2016–2019) are accused of mismanagement and squandering public funds in the Telecom Ministry, a scandal first flagged in 2019. Parliament will decide whether to create an investigative committee to examine their case. Amin Salam: Former Economy Minister (2021–2025), currently detained, faces accusations of embezzlement, falsification, illicit enrichment and blackmailing insurance companies, following a complaint from the parliamentary Economy Committee. 3. Who decides when immunity is lifted? Why is it so political, and how can justice work if Parliament polices itself? The procedure is supposed to be straightforward: A request to lift immunity is submitted by a magistrate, who sends it to the prosecutor general at the Court of Cassation. The prosecutor prepares a formal note and forwards it to the justice minister. The justice minister submits an official request to Parliament, including the nature of the alleged offense, the time and place it occurred and a summary of the evidence. The parliament speaker convenes the Bureau of the Chamber and the Administration and Justice Committee. A sub-commission is formed to draft a report within two weeks, recommending either not to lift the immunity or to request further investigation. Whether or not the report is finalized, the case is brought to a plenary session for a vote. The vote requires a relative majority, with a quorum of at least 65 MPs present. The MP may present their defense beforehand, but the vote occurs in their absence. However, attempts to lift immunity face major obstacles, most notably during the investigation into the Aug. 4, 2020, Beirut Port explosion. Several MPs who held positions of responsibility at the time were shielded from prosecution after Parliament refused to lift their immunity. While Parliament is the sole authority empowered by law to make such decisions, critics argue that this has amounted to an abuse of power and a clear misuse of the process in cases of such magnitude. It should be noted that Parliament has lifted an MP's immunity only five times in Lebanon, in cases ranging from weapons smuggling in 1959 to drug trafficking in 1994 and embezzlement in 2000.
LBCI
a day ago
- LBCI
EU chief demands 'explanations' from Zelensky on anti-graft agencies
European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen has demanded "explanations" from Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky over legislative changes removing the independence of two key anti-corruption bodies, the EU said Wednesday. "President von der Leyen conveyed her strong concerns about the consequences of the amendments, and she requested explanations from the Ukrainian government," EU spokesman Guillaume Mercier said. AFP
