Can Parliament meet to amend Constitution?

 

Constitutional and legal experts agree that the public interest dictates that Parliament meet to amend the Constitution to allow the election of Lebanese Armed Forces Commander General Michel Suleiman to the presidency, around whom there appears to be an emerging consensus. Yet with the expiration of the last president”s term in office, Parliament is required by the Constitution to meet exclusively to elect the head of state and do nothing else.

 

Article 75 of the Lebanese Constitution stipulates: “The chamber meeting to elect the president of the republic is considered an electoral body and not a legislative assembly. It must proceed immediately, without discussion or any other act, to elect the head of state.” However, electing Suleiman, a grade one civil servant, would require a constitutional amendment.

 

Recognizing the existence of constitutional constraints that paralyze the legislative body, constitutional expert and professor Hassan al-Rifai told The Daily Star that the public interest supercedes these constraints. “From [former presidents] Beshara al-Khoury to Emile Lahoud, the Constitution has long been amended for the sake of individuals. I am against that, but not in this exceptional case where the public interest requires an amendment,” he said.

 

He said that Parliament should have met without a call by Speaker Nabih Berri on former President Emile Lahoud”s last day in office and elected a president. “Parliament can still meet to pass certain emergency laws that need to be rushed through, such as amending tax laws, for example,” Rifai said, adding that in this extraordinary situation the country is going through common sense and the public interest must prevail.

 

Rifai said the draft amendment must pass through the present Cabinet and then on to Parliament to be made law. But the opposition continues to insist the government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora is unconstitutional and incapable of overseeing the passing of such an amendment. “This government is completely constitutional and legitimate, it has not lost a third of its members, nor have the resignations of the opposition ministers been accepted by the president, so they too are not considered resigned,” Rifai said.
 

Rifai said that MPs are delegated by the people to elect the head of state. “To say they refuse to attend an electoral session is a crime against the Constitution and punishable under Articles 701 and 707 of the penal code,” Rifai said.

 

Legal expert and professor Ghaleb Mahmassani told The Daily Star that any constitutional text has to be interpreted in such a way that helps – not hinders – the functioning of constitutional institutions. He said that Article 75 is not very clear in any case and Parliament still reserves its right to legislate and pass amendments in extreme cases where the public interest needs to be served.

 

“Parliament cannot remain an electoral body for months on end while the country remains without a legislative body and a vacancy in the top post persists. Parliament remains capable of legislating in cases of extreme need and maintains its right to legislate to fill a vacancy in the top job,” Mahmassani said.

 

He said that a draft amendment needs to come from MPs and then needs to be presented to the government which then submits it to Parliament for a vote. “There are many procedures that need to be followed to pass an amendment and it would be very difficult to accomplish this in a single day,” Mahmassani said. He added that as long as Parliament has not met to vote for a new president it is not to be considered an “electoral body” as Article 75 stipulates, but can still continue to function as a legislative body.