Abdullah Alkabir

One of the axioms of political work is consistency, unity of opinions and positions towards events when they are similar, meaning that there is no duality in the position based on interest, but rather building the strategy from the ground up according to national interests and goals, and this will necessarily lead to avoiding double standards, as it is not possible, for example, for a politician to violate the law or not to object to violating it as long as it is beneficial to her/him, and protest and reject violating it if it is not in his/her interest.
The fear of falling into the trap of contradiction is the reason for the ambiguity of some statements by political figures, which can be interpreted either way, so we see them hesitate in announcing their positions, they go first to evaluate the position in all its dimensions, and activate their memory in search of similar previous positions or events, and what their comment was on such matter at that time, as for amateurs, they are often the ones who fall into the trap of contradiction, without thinking or feeling often, because they practice political work with a confined horizon not more than serving their narrow interests.
With developments of the crisis that have protracted for more than a decade after the February Revolution, many figures have appeared on the Libyan political scene falling into countless contradictions. With the escalation of the crisis and the intensification of the conflict, these contradictions have become clear to every observer and a source of ridicule for social media activists.
Some members of the House of Representatives frequently appear on satellite channels, and have not missed an opportunity to criticize the Government of National Accord in Tripoli’s use of the Turkish government to thwart Haftar’s attack on Tripoli, considering this measure a violation of national sovereignty. Yet, they ignore the House of Representatives’ approval of the militias affiliated with it, contracting the Russian security company Wagner, by an undeclared agreement, as stated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Some of them violate the law, do not abide by the legal rules, and refuse to implement judicial rulings if such rules are against them. At the same time, they resort to this judiciary to challenge the decisions of their opponents, accusing them of exceeding their powers according to the legal references that they had previously failed to abide by.
The House of Representatives, the Government of National Unity, the Central Bank, and other institutions did not comply with some of the legal rulings issued against them, completely ignored them as if they did not exist, and at the same time, they are never late in filing lawsuits and petitions with the Attorney General, within the framework of the prevailing state of conflict between the conflicting political parties.
Using the law as a weapon to strike at the opponents, an approach used by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to the extent of establishing a constitutional court, in a bid to abrogate the constitutional chamber of the High Court, with the intention of transferring powers of the Constitutional Chamber to Aqila’s Constitutional Court, and here a contradiction will emerge that is not without humor, as the country does not resort to a constitution that requires a constitutional court, which organizes the legal authority according to the articles of the constitution, and decides any constitutional dispute between the institutions, and the constitutional declaration is limited in size and interim, and therefore does not need an independent constitutional court.
Another contradiction is that political figures ignore public opinion in cases of calm, and the absence of anything that would shake power and influence, and resort to addressing it and appealing to gain sympathy if the seat of power is seriously threatened.
The politician makes many statements and media appearances, hoping to influence public opinion to support him before he falls from his seat of power and is shattered. Even after the fall, he did not hesitate to appeal to public opinion by addressing it through the media, while these figures ignored people’s complaints, protests, and legitimate demands to improve their conditions, when their power was firmly established and not threatened with collapse.
These blatant contradictions in Libyan political behavior can be considered an additional takeaway lesson in the political transition phase, when the political elite exceeds its basic role in establishing the foundations of the state, and is tempted to exercise power, so it deviates from its duties and role, and its goal becomes to preserve their own power and privileges thereof, and engage in a state of conflict with other political forces and figures, so chaos prevails, disintegration increases, and the collapse continues, as an inevitable prelude, until the moment of explosion comes, so the system restores its presence with new arrangements that is a mere temporary truce in-between chaos or revolution breaks out.
______________________
