The principles for applying this law include

1- An amnesty law has been promulgated on 27/8/91. The first article covers crimes committed before 28 March 1991, the second article of this    same law stipulates the following:

A complete amnesty for:

• Crimes committed against the State’s internal security, except those excluded.
• Crimes cited by law 11/01/1958 (knowingly instigating civil war, sectarian unrest, arming Lebanese against each other, insurrection, organizing armed groups, terrorism...).
• Crimes of political nature with local or general characters including political crimes provided they were not committed for personal reasons...

2- The amnesty does not apply to the above crimes if they were repetitive and continuous or whose perpetrators persisted on committing them after the present law came into effect; in this case the pursuance will start from the point where the above law ceased to apply.

3- the article of Amnesty law excludes the following:

Excluded from the dispositions of this law:

• Crimes referred to court before this law came into effect.
• Assassinations or attempted murders committed against religious figures, diplomats and politicians.

4- Article eight of the law stipulates the following:

Regardless of all other dispositions, all murders or attempted murders against religious figures and politicians committed before 28/3/91 inclusive are considered cases to be referred to the courts.

5- Article 9 of Amnesty Law stipulates the following:

For the duration of one year from the moment this law takes effect, the government is invested with the exceptional power of bestowing the right of grace, by a ministerial decree (which has the same effect as that of Amnesty) on whoever convicted or pursued for crimes excluded in the amnesty and committed before 28/3/91 against the State’s internal and external security. This would follow the limits of the following rules:

1. The decree bestows the right of grace on the beneficiary to leave the country for a specific time during which he should stay abroad; and this applies to crimes that are not yet the object of a judicial decision.
2. After the proclamation of the grace decree, it will be denied to whoever commits one of the following:

• Does not adhere to the condition of leaving the country and remain abroad for the specific period.

• Becomes a political activist inside or outside the country whatever the nature and means of his activity.

• Commits an act of any nature against the public order or the State’s security.

• Commits an act of any nature against national unity or the country’s interest or with the aim to encourage discord in the community.

Violations of the General principles of Amnesty Law No 84/91:

1. The Amnesty Law, when signaling exclusions to application of articles 2, 3 and 9, aims to get around the principle and the finality of all amnesty law by allowing the exaction and crimes of war to disappear "in order to facilitate the process of normalization and pacification of the situation".The general effect of the amnesty passes to oblivion.  It means the removal of the criminal fact and its character of infringement in hindsight (G. of the Faure, of Effects of the amnesty, Thesis, Bordeaux, 1934).In the same sense, the magistrate Atef Nakib in his Treaty of Penal Procedure, second edition, 1993, p. 186 to 191, noted that the will of the Lebanese legislator was to turn the page of the consequences of events, such events having had taken place during the war and removing them from memory, in the State’s bid to achieve inter-communal Lebanese accord.

2. Amnesty Law is blemished with the vice of its abuse, by the regime, for political ends.  The principle of equality before the law is a Right enshrined in the doctrine, jurisdictions, constitutional traditions and regulations. The violation of this principle constitutes a serious breach to democracy, justice and equality.The Article eight of the amnesty law, according to Professor Edmond Naim, can have only the following significance:  “The text of this article replaces the decree of referral to the judicial court for all matters which were the target of policy makers. Litigation is a matter therefore for the expertise of the judicial court since these matters had been sent back to the court by decree. The only difference between the return by decree and the return according to article eight lies in the fact that murders of politicians and religious figures, are not sent back by ministerial decree but are immediately referred according to article eight.

3. The last paragraph of article 2, which calls for the annulment of the right to benefit from the amnesty in case of recidivism, constitutes in itself a form of nonsense as well as an obvious illegality. How is recidivism conceived when the amnesty -by definition- erases the first crime.Indeed, concerning the appreciation of the recidivism, one reads in the Encyclopedia Dalloz- Droit Penal the following: "The first condemnation being erased by the amnesty, the accused must be considered for the second fact like a primary delinquent" (Orleans; 12 summary December 1947-Dalloz).   Also it is worth to note an interview with Judge Mounif Ouweidat (former Attorney General of the Republic and a judge at the Dany Chamoun assassination and the Zouk church trial cases) that appeared in the weekly Lebanese Al Massira on 9/3/1998. In the interview he admitted that the amnesty law is unjust and circumstantial, and said that Dr. Samir Geagea has been condemned according to a bad law requiring total amendment.

THE DECREE OF DISSOLVING THE LEBANESE FORCES PARTY:

In 1991 the Lebanese Forces dissolved its armed branch in accordance with the Taef accord. This should have occurred as a part of the disbanding of all armed militias on Lebanese territory; Hezbollah, Amal, The Palestinians and other pro-Syrian militias are still armed and operating in Lebanon today.

Notification 178/AD: (complete text)
Creation of an association named "The Lebanese Forces Party"
Minister of Interior According to the decree number 861 of the 24/1/1990,
According to the law of associations of the 30/8/1909, notably article 6,
According to the demand addressed by founders of the association named "The LebaneseForces Party"
registered as political and administrative business under the number 2/1533 of the 22/7/1991,
According to the proposition of the general director of the ministry, we decide the following:

Authorization is granted to the named association "The Lebanese Forces Party"
Address: Beirut - Achrafieh - Building number 20/2800.

Objectives:

1. The safeguard of the independence and the sovereignty of Lebanon as well as the safeguard of its specific characteristic within its internationally recognized borders.
2. The foundation of the Lebanese state on the basis of the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
3. The restoration of a democratic and social system allowing all citizens to enjoy human rights, dignity and Freedom.

The founding members: Fouad Elias Malek - Richard Edmond Jreissati - Ibrahim Petro Yazigi - Amjad Jamil Iskandar - Joseph Daoud Rizk.

The representative of the association towards the government: Mr. Fouad Elias Malek.

Beirut September 10, 1991
Major-General Sami Khatib - Secretary of the Ministry of Interior
Ministerial B-decree

On 23/03/1994, about two weeks after the assault on the Zouk church, the cabinet met in an emergency session. Without waiting for any judicial process to take place, and even before the initiation of any investigation, the authorities decided to disband the Lebanese Forces Party and confiscate all its assets. The pretext was a "plot against the security of the state".

In the following is the complete text of the decree no. 4908:

Annulment of authorization granted to the named association “ The Lebanese Forces Party” Beirut.

The President of the Republic,
According to the constitution,
According to Associations Law of the 3/8/1909 and its amendments, notably the article 3,
According to memorandum 178/AD of the 10/9/1991 concerning the creation
of an association named "The Lebanese Forces Party", Beirut,
According to the proposition of the Secretary of the Ministry of Interior,
And following the approval of the cabinet on 23/3/1994,
Enact the following:

We declare void authorization 178/AD of the 10/9/1991 concerning the creation of the association named
"The Lebanese Forces Party" of Beirut, and the dissolution of the so-called association.

Baabda the 23/3/1994
Signed by:
The President of the Republic Elias Herawi,
Prime Minister Rafic Hariri and
Minister of Interior Bechara Merhej

Flagrant Illegalities

This decree is flawed on account of the following:

1. The authorization is not an ordinary simple permit; therefore it cannot be withdrawn. It is not a gift from the authorities concerned. It only aims at informing the Government of the association avoiding any secret activity.
2. The law doesn't include any relative disposition to the cancellation of the notification; it only allows the dissolution of an association on two grounds:

• In case the association adopts concepts antagonistic to the law and the goodwill, with activities aiming at violently changing the political system (article 3 of the law of associations of 1909).
• However, this is not the case with the Lebanese Forces whose political project is founded on legitimate, peaceful and solemn principles mentioned in the memorandum and never contemplated the violent change of the political regime.
• In case where members of the party carry acts against the security of the state, their crimes must be made the object of judicial action. (Article one of the law promulgated by decree no. 10830 on 9/10/1962).

This is not the case with the LF, since there was no judicial basis to justify the cancellation of the memorandum.

This decree is not justified; it doesn't mention any motives for the cancellation and the dissolution.

It is contrary to principles of the Lebanese constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

In the same way, it goes against the fundamental freedoms of the citizens, freedom of expression, communication and creed.

The administrative authority has in principle been given a large discretionary power concerning its administrative actions; in contrary, its competence is limited in domains of decisions regarding the public liberties guaranteed by the constitution and by the law.

Finally, it should be noted that the government didn't even obtain recourse to the exceptional circumstance theory to justify its decision, knowing that this principle doesn't apply to the context, and that anyway, it would not have permitted it.

Later, lawyers acting for the Lebanese Forces presented a submission to the Court regarding the illegality of the decree. They asked for its annulment, and therefore the resumption of the political activities of the party.

Unfortunately, and after five years, the Court of the State Council has yet to respond to the lawyers’ submission whereas the judicial court contradicted in its verdict of July 13 1996 this decree when it cleared the chief of The Lebanese Forces in the Zouk church case; it is worth noting that this case was supposed to be the origin of all judicial measures taken against the Lebanese Forces.