The so called 3orf of not appointing election losers as ministers

[joe tayyar]

Originally Posted by Nasser

Now you're speaking about names and person , I am speaking about the constitution and theory , about being with/against the 3orf ( I am against having 3orf ).

Now about your opinion of Nassib Lahoud ,well its yours and I respect it ( and off topic too , so I won't reply to the point ).

I agree with you.
Speaking about the costitution, rare people apply the constitution 100% in lebanon thats why they moved to the a3raf.
Why not making a 3eref for the president to have more power.
Though im against the a3raf, changing the constitution or ta3deel, and applying it 100% is a better solution.

[Venom]

the problem is the ministry of telecom or Bassil?

if it is Bassil, then no need for him to become a minister but FPM should keep the ministry of telecom since it was well managed when it was handed over to them....

if FM wants it then it should be switched with ministry of Finance, if the president wants it then it should be switched with ministry of interior. if LF wants it then ...LOL....

[joseph_lubnan]

Originally Posted by Venom

the problem is the ministry of telecom or Bassil?

if it is Bassil, then no need for him to become a minister but FPM should keep the ministry of telecom since it was well managed when it was handed over to them....

if FM wants it then it should be switched with ministry of Finance, if the president wants it then it should be switched with ministry of interior. if LF wants it then ...LOL....

Its not so unbelievable that the problem may be both!

Perhaps they dont want Bassil specifically or losers in the elections in general, and at the same time they dont want you to have the telecom ministry.

[Venom]

Originally Posted by joseph_lubnan

Its not so unbelievable that the problem may be both!

Perhaps they dont want Bassil specifically or losers in the elections in general, and at the same time they dont want you to have the telecom ministry.

if it is up to them they would have formed the gov from round 1...

there will be no gov without meeting FPM's demands....

it is not clear for u ya joseph so far?!!

[elador]

Originally Posted by joseph_lubnan

Its not so unbelievable that the problem may be both!

Perhaps they dont want Bassil specifically or losers in the elections in general, and at the same time they dont want you to have the telecom ministry.

what is your opinion? should FPM keep the ministry of telecom or not? if not who do you suggest to have it?

I bet that you dont mind as long as it's not Bassil or any other FPMer.

Now look back and tell me when did we ever say LF or Kataeb should not have this ministry or that? when did we ever say this ministry should go to our ally Amal or HA but not to the LF??

i would respect you more if you say that you want the ministry of telecom for yourselves, but refusing it for FPM to give it back to hamadeh or Hariri is typical you (by you i mean LF, Kataeb, and the holy batrak)

and if the ministry of education is so much more important than the ministry of telecom why don't you fight for it? why you want GMA to drop the Minstry of telecom for the education??

[hashour]

I wonder why it is unacceptable to have a person who was not elected as a minister in the gvt, yet it is acceptable to have someone who did not run for elections in the cabinet.

The fact that they do not represent the people apply in both cases, not to mention that someone who did run for the elections and failed knows that he has some popular support, whereas the person who did not run for the elections does not know how far do the people support him….

Again, I fail to see why it is a prerequisite to be elected in order to be part of the cabinet, especially in the case of Lebanon. In Canada for instance, the gvt is formed of MPs. In this case it is a requisite since the gvt ministers must answer to the MPs questions and are accountable for their decisions. And only MPs are allowed to be part of the sessions. So if a minister is appointed and he is not an MP, he cannot attend and the opposition MPs cannot question him.

This is not the case in Leb, since there is virtually no accountability for the gvt, neither from the people nor their MPs.

[elador]

Originally Posted by joseph_lubnan

The last government doesn't count because it was a secondary government in the tenure of the previous parliament, that came out of the mini civil war and the Doha surrender documents, after the first government was unconstitutionally sacked by Hezbollah's militias in the streets.

In the first government after the 2005 elections were there losers in the parliamentary elections? In previous governments in Lebanon's history, (government that were formed ensuing to parliamentary elections and not government that came about later due to resignations and other events) were there elections losers appointed? I am curious to find out?

Further the "loser" concept was popularized by you, FPM and from top "GMA" regarding the issue of the president, and if it applies for presidents, why shouldn't it apply for ministers, and if you were so proud of it then why be so against it now? (p.s some claim that GMA even made the comments in relation to the 2005 government formation, although I do not have a direct source for that, so I will ignore this claim. If someone has a credible source for that please post it.)

Jawebak ta7et batak!! enno the losers participated in the previous government because of a mini civil war? shou jeb toz la marhaba?

[Diabolo_7]

Originally Posted by elador

Jawebak ta7et batak!! enno the losers participated in the previous government because of a mini civil war? shou jeb toz la marhaba?

he will come back with part II the de-facto military rule

[Diabolo_7]

Gebran Bassil or Wi'am Wahhab, which one would you prefer?

On one hand, you can break the so-called 3orof and get someone with a proven track record as a minister, or you can keep the 3orof and get a clown for a minister...

pick your poison...

[vegojimbo]

Originally Posted by Nasser

Weren't you FPMers launching harsh attacks on Nassib Lahoud when he was running for presidency saying he is a loser in the elections ? using such logic started by you.

Simple, the president represents the people and the Republic so he ought to be truly representative of the people in a democratic system, while a minister does not have to. His mission is merely to serve, popularity doesn't come into play in the picking of ministers. Competence however should, in fact it ought to be the only criterion resorted to when appointing ministers.