In relation to the debates in Misrata that LIBYAPROSPECT posted on Tuesday, Suliman Elbayoudi, an independent, in support of the dialogue taking place in Skhirat, has openly commented on the arguments against the dialogue.
He starts off by saying that there are people putting forward a drift of nonsense arguments against the drafts and the dialogue process, without proposing any other alternatives. He says, if they are refusing the draft they should at least provide an alternative option for Libyans to follow. Elbayoudi believes that these people only refute the drafts due to ideological reasons. He says, these could be explained in two main points: the first point is, the existence of the army and the police, they are refusing this point due to increasing fear of return of the Gadhafi regime; and the second point is, the fear of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) forcing legislation on Libya. Elbayoudi elaborates on these two points.
In relation to the first point, he says, these people have a negative image of the army and the police force, and they do not want to have persons or names involved in the appointment process. Elbayoudi says that they are delusional, and confused on the existence of the army. He clarifies that UNSMIL and the delegates agree with them, on the fact that reformations have to take place, but these reformations must be done in a professional manner, this point is very clear in the draft.
He says they also refuse to sign on the draft as they believe that the next step should not be forming a government, but it should be about taking security measures. Elbayoudi says, it is definite that once the government is formed, their top priority will be to fix the security issues in the country, to rebuild the destroyed cities and areas and look at the humanitarian issues in the country, it is illogical to take security measures before creating a government. Elbayoudi says that, in the long term there will be a higher State Council, it is just for the time being that the current State Council will be in power, they will just be there to propose projects for the future government to undertake.
The second point of his, is the implementation of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL). He believes that, the ones that refuse the draft, want to convince others that IHL will change the legislation of Libya, they say if the IHL is implemented it will not coincide with Sharia Law. They express the problems they will meet, by giving an example of legalising homosexual marriage, they say that if the IHL does get implemented, the UN will find that homosexual marriage is illegal in Libya and impose on Libyans to change that, and legalise homosexual marriage. Elbayoudi replies to these arguments by saying, they are ignorant, it is a known fact that not all the countries in Europe have legalised homosexuality, so why would they come to Libya and impose it on us? He says, it is clear that they are trying to steer the public opinion against the IHL by cherry-picking a topic that will not even be implemented.
Elbayoudi adds to this by saying, there is a term in the IHL called “Constant Essence”, the protocols of this protect the country’s right to not be forced to change their laws and step away from their norms in their society. So, this fear of homosexuality being implemented in Libya is false.
When talking about the decision of the Constitutional Higher Court, he says that no one including the UN envoy to Libya, Bernardino Leon, has refused or gone against the verdict, but the explanation of the court’s decision contained many contradictions, according to many prolific law specialists, the explanation of the court’s decision was vague, which led to both sides believing they are correct, the General National Council (GNC) believed the court ruled in their favour and against the House of Representatives (HoR) and vice versa. The decision was not clear-cut and to the point. Elbayoudi elaborates on this, he raised the question, have you seen any democratic state in the world, where the people voted for the government, but the court denounces them and undermines their authority? In any country the most sovereign power, is the power of the people, it is more powerful than the executive, the legislature, and even the judiciary. No verdict can go against anything that the people have voted on.