MONGABAY.COM
Mongabay.com seeks to raise interest in and appreciation of wild lands and wildlife, while examining the impact of emerging trends in climate, technology, economics, and finance on conservation and development (more)
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
|
|
Lebanon
Index
As with other branches of government, the judiciary suffered as
a result of the 1975 Civil War and the ensuing disruptions. Prior
to the war, the Lebanese justice system mirrored many features
common to West European systems especially that of France. The
Ministry of Justice had official authority over the judicial
system, but the Supreme Council of Justice, a body consisting of
eleven judges appointed by the president in consultation with
leaders of the sects, exercised actual jurisdiction over the
various courts. It appointed judges to the several courts and could
transfer or remove them. There were fifty-six courts of first
instance, with seventeen in Beirut alone, and each was presided
over by a single magistrate. Cases from these courts could be
appealed to one of eleven courts of appeal, each of which had a
three-judge panel. Above these were four courts of cassation, on
which sat three judges each. Three of these courts adjudicated
civil cases, and one heard criminal complaints.
Several other courts existed outside this general framework.
The six-member Council of State functioned as an appeals court for
administrative matters, and the Judicial Council, which included
the most senior judge of the courts of cassation and four other
judges appointed by the government, ruled on cases of public
security. In addition, there were a few other special courts that
heard questions relating to the military, the press, and business
affairs.
Matters of personal status, dealing with such issues as
marriage and inheritance, were in the domain of the various sects
(see Lebanese
Confessional "Societies,"
ch. 2). These cases
sometimes involved complex layers of appeal. Maronites and Greek
Catholics, for example, could appeal to the Vatican, whereas Greek
Orthodox could look to the Patriarchal Court in Damascus for
relief. Shias and Sunnis, in contrast, often dealt with appeals
locally and based decisions on sharia
(see Tenets of Islam
, ch. 2).
As might be expected in a society based on patronage, political
interference in judicial affairs was not uncommon, and pressures
from zuama on judges often influenced rulings. Observers
noted that confessionalism also marred the judicial system, not
only in the selection of judges, some of whom were mediocre
jurists, but also in the determination of criminal penalties.
As of 1987, the Ministry of Justice was an active portfolio,
but there was little evidence that the judiciary resembled its
prewar status; only a few government-run courts seemed to be in
operation. These apparently handled only minor civil and criminal
cases and ultimately were circumscribed by the desires of the local
militias.
Data as of December 1987
|
|