A judicial decision re -moves the trial of Al -Bitar … What is the fate of the port’s investigations?

Tony Karam wrote in “Al -Watan’s Call”: In light of a wide judicial and political monitoring, the file linked to the claim of the discriminatory public prosecutor returned to the judge investigator Tariq Al -Bitar to the fore, coinciding with the waiting of Bulgaria’s position on Lebanon’s request to hand over the operator of the “Roussos” ship, Igor Gritschukin, one of the keys to the “Black Fund” in the issue of ammonium nitrate and the bombing of the Beirut port.

The accusation body in Beirut, headed by Judge Elias Eid and the membership of the two judges, Pierre Francis and Rabie Hossami, issued a decision to amend the decision of the investigating judge, Habib Rizkallah, and the request of the Public Prosecution Office to provide Rizkallah with documents and documents that promote the prosecution against the judge, during the period of Judge Ghassan Munif Awaidat, the duties of the discriminatory public prosecutor.
According to special information, the commission relied on Article 62 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the “legal adaptation” request to claim the discriminatory public prosecutor, which authorizes the investigating judge to claim the Public Prosecution to attach the prosecution of the documents that prove the elements of the defendant. The commission stressed the adoption of this article without any other, unlike the investigating judge’s reference to Article 64, and not to dive into the validity of the prosecution.
Judge Rizkallah, which is specifically appointed to consider the prosecution submitted by the discriminatory public prosecutor against Al -Bitar, considered that this claim was “a defect”, because it was not included in the procedures and decisions issued by Al -Bitar, which constitutes the basis of the claimed offense. Accordingly, he refrained from going to investigate, calling on the Public Prosecution to correct the prosecution, prompting Judge Awaidat to appeal the decision.
The accusation body, and after its study of the appeal, considered unanimously, according to the information, that the investigating judge, Habib Rizk Allah, could, but rather, his duty, to ask the discriminatory public prosecutor to provide him with the decisions and procedures supporting the prosecution, instead of refraining from the investigation, returning the prosecution and requesting its correction.
The commission considered that refraining from the investigation is not based on a legal justification as long as the law allows the investigating judge to request pro -documents, without going into the “defects” of the complaint. Consequently, it was concluded to amend the decision of God’s provision, and to assign the discriminatory Public Prosecution to deposit the documents that support its accusation of the judicial investigator.
In a related context, he learned that the discriminatory public prosecutor has already started since it received the accusation committee’s decision yesterday, which accelerates the preparation of the required documents to refer them to Judge Habib Rizkallah, in preparation for issuing his upcoming decision in light of what is presented to him.