October 2, 2026
The former governor of the Bank of Lebanon, Riad Salameh, is waging a heated legal battle before the French judiciary to challenge the validity of the seizure of financial assets outside France linked to him and his son, Nadi, at a time when Lebanese depositors are still awaiting the fate of their savings that have been withheld for years.
On October 1, Salama’s lawyers filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal in Paris, disputing the jurisdiction of the French judiciary to seize real estate and financial assets in the United Kingdom and Belgium that are managed through two companies. According to Agence France-Presse, the value of these assets is estimated at approximately 37 million euros, and the judiciary is scheduled to issue its decision in this regard on November 26.
The course of the litigation witnessed an intense debate, as William Burdon and Vincent Bringart, lawyers for the Sherpa Organization and the Association of Victims of Fraudulent and Criminal Practices in Lebanon, accused Salama’s defense of resorting to deliberate “procedural maneuvers” to delay the conclusion of the investigations and trial. On the other hand, the defense agents raised the conditions of their client’s detention, noting that the Lebanese Public Prosecution prevented them from meeting him in the hospital on September 22nd, stressing his right to treatment and guaranteeing the rights of the defense.
For its part, the Lebanese state entered the litigation line through its lawyer, Emmanuel Daoud, who argued for the necessity of dealing with suspected money laundering incidents as an interconnected unit between France and abroad, in order to prove French jurisdiction, awaiting what the judiciary will decide in this matter.
This legal dispute comes in the context of a broader file; In August 2023, the United States, Britain, and Canada imposed coordinated sanctions on Salama and those close to him. The US Treasury Department accused the former ruler of using the company “Fawry Associates”, owned by his brother Raja, to transfer about 330 million dollars through transactions related to the Bank of Lebanon. These are accusations contained in the sanctions decisions and do not constitute final criminal rulings.
On the other hand, Salameh denies all the accusations and accusations directed against him, stressing that his wealth comes from his income prior to assuming power and his private investments. He refuses to hold him individually responsible for the financial collapse, considering himself a “scapegoat.” However, his critics believe that this narrative does not exempt him from accountability for his three-decade management of monetary policy.
The repercussions of this battle are not limited to the purely judicial aspect; Accepting the challenge to jurisdiction, or even seizing assets, does not necessarily mean their final confiscation or immediate return to Lebanon. Concerned circles confirm that it is not permissible to sell depositors fictitious promises of an imminent recovery of funds, or to consider any procedural success of the defense team as a certificate of Salameh’s innocence.
The Lebanese remain facing a harsh paradox, which is mobilizing all forms of defense to protect the assets of officials outside the borders, while leaving the rights of depositors suspended without a horizon, in a crisis that reflects the depth of the moral and political scandal of a banking system that collapsed under the weight of previous policies.
