On 18 and 19 June, the Libyan capital is due to host an UN-sponsored dialogue aimed at resolving the country's current political crisis. The two-day dialogue comes within framework of the initiative proposed by head of the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) Tarek Mitri on Thursday, 5 June. It also comes only a few days ahead of the parliamentary elections that have been set for 25 June. The dialogue proposal, a copy of which has been obtained by Al-Ahram Weekly, features a preamble and a declaration of principles that are to be binding on all parties. This is the most important portion of the proposal and the part that raises the most questions, as the issues involved are the most divisive and controversial among the political, social and military stakeholders that will be taking part in the meeting. Among the principles contained in the dialogue initiative is that the forthcoming government must have broad support among the members of the new parliament, regardless of the results of the forthcoming elections. To many Libyan political forces, especially the non-Islamists, this could mean that the government would not be formed by the majority party in the newly elected assembly. This, in turn, could be seen as inconsistent with the accepted practices of democratic systems of government or as a circumvention of parliamentary legitimacy. The seeming haste to hold the conference ahead of the legislative elections has also contributed to doubts and suspicions. The binding principles, which include matters concerning how to form the new government, would impose certain conditions or commitments on parliament even before it is elected. The dialogue proposal also calls for a halt to “the military operations in the eastern region in all their ground and aerial forms” and for communications with the “concerned parties” in order to establish a truce so as to make it possible to reach a political solution. The wording refers to “Operation dignity” launched by retired General Khalifa Haftar, former commander of Libyan land forces, several weeks ago against his Islamist adversaries. The preamble to the declaration of principles mentions the need to “determine the future of the revolutionaries through consultation with them and through their inclusion in the political process”. However, the term “revolutionaries” remains ambiguous. There was no attempt to specify who might be classed as a “revolutionary” or any criteria for such a classification, which only perpetuates the confusion and potential controversy surrounding this matter. The preamble also calls on all Libyan parties “to refrain from using the media to incite” violence and hatred. The Islamists, in particular, fear that this could be used as a pretext to restrict freedom of the press in the context of what they see as a campaign against the media, whether on the part of the government, as reflected in some official statements, or on the part of religious officials, as epitomised by the charges of incitement continually levelled by the mufti against liberal and secularist media outlets. The text also contains the following passage: “The participants value UNSMIL's and the international community's sponsorship of this agreement and their provision of guarantees to assist in properly implementing its provisions in cooperation with the relevant agencies. The participants look forward to strengthening Libya's partnership with its international partners so that it can benefit from the expertise they can offer in the field of building an institutionalised state governed by the rule of law.” The first version of the document, which had been obtained by the Weekly, contained 19 points. These have since been amended, apart from the second point pertaining to the date of the parliamentary elections. The Weekly has also learned that the nine international special envoys to Libya, headed by US envoy David Satterfield and British Ambassador to Libya Michael Aron, are pushing for an “expanded meeting”, as UNSMIL chief Mitri put it, on 18 and 19 June, or about a week ahead of parliamentary elections. They are thinking in terms of 30 to 50 representatives of the diverse political and social forces in Libya, although they have not yet specified these forces. In a development that is certain to affect the prospects of the dialogue initiative, the Libyan Supreme Court has just settled the weeks-old controversy surrounding the election of the new Prime Minister Ahmed Maetig. Several members of the General National Congress (GNC) had filed suits with the court contesting the legitimacy of the voting procedures that led to the selection of Maetig to succeed the current caretaker premier, Abdullah Al-Thinni. On Monday, the court ruled that the procedures were not constitutional. Accordingly, Al-Thinni will continue to serve in a caretaker capacity until a new prime minister is elected or until after legislative elections are held 25 June. The Supreme Court held its first hearing on the prime ministerial elections last Thursday. The public prosecutor argued against the legitimacy of the procedures on the grounds that they violated the provisions of the August 2011 Constitutional Declaration. The lawyers representing Maetig defended the constitutionality of the procedures. Following a brief period of deliberation, the court moved to defer its verdict until Monday. When it reconvened that day, the presiding judge read out “the verdict on the constitutionality suit 1161 brought by GNC member Al-Sherif Al-Wafi Mohamed against the chairman of the GNC.” The verdict read: “In the name of the people, the court, in all its chambers, has accepted the suit in form and rules that the GNC decision 38 of 2014 pertaining to the appointment of Ahmed Omar Maetig as interim prime minister is unconstitutional.” Many political circles cheered the verdict that they hailed as a sign that the Libyan judiciary has an effective presence, contrary to the claims of some. The question of the election of the prime minister was one of the rare cases in Libyan history when disputants turned to the Supreme Court to arbitrate. In fact, it is only the second since the establishment of the Libyan judiciary following national independence. The first instance took place in the monarchical era when the court overturned the decree issued by King Idris in 1954 to dissolve the parliament of Tripolitania, as the western region was called at the time. In his first remarks after the ruling Monday, Maetig said that he respected and would abide by the court's decision. “What happened today is one of the most important gains from the process of building the institutionalised government ruled by law that we all seek,” he said in a press conference held immediately after the court announced its verdict. Maetig, a prominent businessman from Misrata, added that he hoped that the court's decision would strengthen government authority and the Libyan people. He stressed that he only ran for the premiership after Al-Thinni had tendered his resignation and that all the actions he had taken since had been in coordination with Al-Thinni. Al-Thinni officially resigned as prime minister several weeks ago after his home and family were threatened, but he agreed to continue as caretaker prime minister until a new premier was elected. Saleh Mahzoum, second deputy president of the GNC, also announced that he would fully abide by the Supreme Court's ruling on the unconstitutionality of Maetig's election as prime minister. Speaking in a press conference in Tripoli on Monday, he said: “The situation will return to what it was before Maetig's election. Abdullah Thinni will continue to act as prime minister. The court has proven that it is capable of issuing rulings and I hope it remains so at all levels.” GNC member Al-Sherif Al-Wafi, one of the political figures to file a suit against the electoral process, said that he had the fullest confidence in the Libyan judiciary from the outset. He along with 13 other GNC members had appealed to the Supreme Court against the constitutionality of the Maetig election. “I am not for Al-Thinni or against Maetig. I stand on the side of right, which was upheld by the Supreme Court,” he said, adding that he believed that Al-Thinni should continue as caretaker prime minister until the forthcoming parliamentary elections, but that he would not object to the election of another prime minister if GNC members agreed to that. In the opinion of February Committee member Azza Maqhour, the Supreme Court's ruling brought the country back to the democratic track after the GNC had steered it off course. In a statement on her Facebook page, the lawyer and rights activist expressed her gratitude to the Libyan judiciary and to the people who demonstrated in the streets. She also praised those members of the GNC that had brought the case against the election of Maetig to the Supreme Court and she saluted the Al-Thinni government for its perseverance until the court issued its verdict. As the situation currently stands, Al-Thinni will remain in his post until the forthcoming legislative elections. Perhaps another encouraging sign for the prospects of the UN-sponsored dialogue initiative is the meeting in Geneva on 3 June that brought together more than 20 representatives of diverse Libyan political groups and tribes. While no one was on hand to represent retired General Haftar in that meeting, most other major political forces and tribal groupings from Libya's major political centres (Tripoli, Benghazi, Misrata, Sabrata and the south) were present as were leading Libyan political figures that reside abroad. The three-day meeting was sponsored by the Moroccan Mohamed Ben Jelloun Foundation. The Weekly has learned that the participants did not discuss the UNSMIL initiative, but did express their opposition to “Operation dignity”. They charged that he was “carrying out a foreign agenda in Libya”. According to the meeting's organisers, the meeting was not so much geared to producing immediate results as it was to creating an “umbrella hospitable to all political parties”. In that framework, participants would air their points of view, after which the meeting would conclude with some preliminary observations without committing to a set political agenda.
