“Lebanon Debate”
From inside a restaurant, a video clip of Lebanese political activist Rawad Nassar ignited a wide wave of controversy, after he appeared expressing his support for the Israeli army’s advance, hoping to reach the Batroun area.
The video quickly spread on social media, sparking angry reactions and demands to open a judicial investigation to look into the content of the statements and whether they warrant legal prosecution.
In this context, lawyer Hassan Adel Bazzi confirmed, in an interview with “Lebanon Debate,” that “the main danger lies not only in what Rawad Nassar said, but also in the reaction of the people who were present in the restaurant and applauded his words,” considering that this “indicates the existence of a group that adopts these positions and interacts with them positively.”
He added: “If Nassar had made these statements while under the influence of alcohol, as he later said, that does not change the essence of the case and does not negate the necessity of investigating those present and the owner of the restaurant who allowed this speech to be issued in the place he manages. The case is not related to Ruwaad alone, but rather includes everyone who contributed, allowed, or encouraged the circulation of this type of speech.”
Bazzi pointed out that “the ideas presented by Nassar address very sensitive and dangerous issues, as they relate to issues punishable by the Lebanese Penal Code, including dealing with Israel, calling for the occupation of Lebanese lands, insulting national sentiment, inciting sectarian strife, and justifying acts of killing,” considering that “these acts are considered crimes for which the resulting penalties, according to Lebanese law, may reach life imprisonment with hard labor and death.”
Bazzi revealed that “a judicial move has already begun, noting that a report had previously been filed against Nassar before the discriminatory Public Prosecution against the backdrop of his positions and statements during the recent period, and the file has been referred to the General Criminal Investigation Department at the Ministry of Justice.”
He added, “Investigations are supposed to begin in the coming hours, and that a group of documents will be included in the file, including the video that sparked widespread controversy over the past two days, along with other relevant materials and documents.”
He pointed out that “among the documents that will be attached is a publication published on an Arabic-language Israeli website that praised Nassar’s positions. This reflects the seriousness of what he issued, as it led, according to Bazzi’s opinion, to an Israeli website publishing his picture and praising his speech.”
Bazzi revealed that “Nassar tried to communicate with him through mutual friends, but he stressed that the issue is not related to a personal dispute, but rather to a file related to Lebanese society and Lebanese law. He stressed that he asked Nassar to provide a clear and detailed apology to the Lebanese people, the people of the south, and the families of the martyrs, considering that what he has issued so far is still insufficient from his point of view.”
Regarding the role of the judiciary, Bazzi stressed that “the problem is not limited to this case alone, but is also linked to the mechanism for dealing with similar files, considering that the security and judicial agencies are supposed to move automatically when issues of this kind are brought to public, without waiting for information to be provided by activists or followers of public affairs.”
He added, “The absence of effective oversight and follow-up contributes to an increase in cases of escapism on social media sites, stressing that the responsibility for following up on these files falls on the competent authorities, whether at the security or judicial level, calling for activating the role of official institutions in implementing laws and maintaining security and stability.”
Bazzi concluded by stressing that “any failure to follow up on these cases holds the state and its relevant agencies directly responsible, stressing the need for each party to play its role within the powers specified for it by law.”
