Democracy is present in Lebanon in form but absent in reality

Democracy is considered a system of governance aimed at empowering the people to participate in political decision-making, distributing power fairly, and protecting individual rights and fundamental freedoms. 

 There are experiences in Arab countries that have successfully established the principle of democracy, such as Tunisia and Morocco, in addition to the regions of North and East Syria, which have chosen Autonomous Administration despite the challenges and wars that Syria is facing. These regions enjoy a high degree of autonomy from the central government in Damascus and have their own administrative and political system. Despite the pressures, the Autonomous Administration manages its affairs well, upholding the principle of respecting the freedom of others, their language, beliefs, and culture.

 Despite the widespread popular aspirations for democracy in the Middle East, this system faces significant challenges such as authoritarian realities and absolute power, which make the transition to democracy a complex and prolonged process. Additionally, the weakness of public institutions due to political parties undermines their ability to practice democracy. Furthermore, external interventions negatively impact the course of democratic transformation.

 In Lebanon, several indicators suggest the presence of obstacles to achieving democracy, particularly sectarianism and confessionalism, which affect decision-making and limit fair representation for all Lebanese citizens. Additionally, the spread of corruption in government institutions and the private sector undermines trust in the government and negatively impacts the provision of public services. Furthermore, external interventions restrict Lebanon's sovereignty and its ability to make independent decisions

 Totalitarian system dominates the Lebanese scene

When the ruling party or party controls all state agencies and suppresses any opposition or difference of opinion, this means a totalitarian system (a totalitarian system of government), and this is what Lebanon has been suffering from over the past years, which is reflected in all aspects of life.

Fouad Zamkahel, Head of the International Federation of Lebanese Businessmen and Businesswomen and Dean of the Faculty of Business Administration at Saint Joseph University, spoke to ANHA's agency and noted that democracy in Lebanon is just a title. "If we delve into the depths, we see that Lebanon does not have any concept of democracy, but rather enjoys a totalitarian system. Lebanon is still besieged in the hands of warlords who reached an agreement to end the war that Lebanon witnessed in 1975, not to peace."

Youssef Fouad Zamkahel added: "This agreement was based on quotas and seats, so Lebanon wore the garment of division." Zamkahel believes that democracy in Lebanon is absent because each head of a region, party or group has his own system, and this is far from democracy.

In Lebanon, (consensus democracy) was invented

Zamkahel explained: "In Lebanon, (consensus democracy) was invented and added to the system, and there is a contradiction between democracy and consensus. For example, elections and their related laws are based not only on sects, but also on the political pillars and poles that dominate the country, and this is far from democracy. The results are known in advance before the elections, and we can know the winner and the loser before the election process is completed. These laws are complex and packaged for some voters according to their interests."

Zamkahel explained consensual democracy and considered that it means that everyone must agree on a specific project or idea, but this contradicts the principle of democracy, which is based on diversity, difference, and respect for competition in projects and ideas. Therefore, Lebanon follows a consensual policy that is far from the foundations of democracy.

Political intransigence is an additional factor in the continuation of crises in Lebanon

The lack of respect for true democracy leads the country to paralysis and stagnation and to several constitutional vacuums in the institutions as is the case in Lebanon, and according to Zamkahel, the solution will not be through democracy but through regional, international or internal deals.

Zamkahel stressed that the lack of respect for democracy contributes to the continuation of crises in Lebanon, in addition to the intransigence, quotas and political division prevailing in Lebanon, which are among the main reasons for the continuation and exacerbation of crises, which makes consensus on common national issues difficult.

Zamkahel believes that the practical solution may be to try to unify the vision and reform the political system based on sects, doctrines and parties, and to build a fair political system that guarantees the representation of all Lebanese.

T/ Satt.

ANHA