Lebanon today »The Triple has become bilateral and scandals are continuing

Waiting for the birth of a government that is supposed to keep pace with the positive change caused by the election of General Joseph Aoun as President of the Republic, and since all parties concerned with the continuous financial collapse since late 2019, its papers began to prepare for the battle to identify responsibilities, and distribute losses on this basis, it became necessary to shed light on the new facts It is prohibited to continue dealing with this file with the same mentality that prevailed since the collapse.

The process of identifying responsibilities at the beginning took some time, before the largest part of the Lebanese was convinced, that what happened with them is responsible for three parties, who are gradually: the state, the Bank of Lebanon and the banks. This trilogy, which was supposed to distribute losses among themselves in any rescue plan, is no longer valid today, and the events have exceeded, and it has become obligatory on any party seeking to identify responsibilities to distribute losses, to adopt a new concept in this complex process.

What is new on this topic is related to the dramatic developments in the crisis. Accordingly, the volume of responsibilities should be measured according to two era: in the first era, the percentage of responsibilities between the three parties: the state, the Bank of Lebanon and the banks. This era includes what happened in the years before the collapse, to the collapse, and perhaps what followed after that for a short period, through the exit of money from some banks in a strict way, whether this exit is classified as illegal or only immoral.

As for the second era, it has extended since the Bank of Lebanon declared the suspension of transfers abroad, in a similar Capital Control, due to the failure of the parliament in the approval of this law, to this day. In this era there are only two parties responsible for what happened: the state and its central bank. The accusation control includes the following committees:

First- the use of depositors ’money in the Bank of Lebanon (foreign currency reserves) to spend and support. This reserve fell until it reached below the $ 9 billion, before the central succeeded again raising it to about 10.4 billion dollars.

Second- Allowing the payment of loans in lira or boams, allowing the transfer of wealth from a section of depositors to borrowers.

Third- Allowing deposits to transfer after the collapse from the lira to the dollar, despite the knowledge of the monetary authorities at the time that there are no real dollars covering these transfers, and that what is going on is merely amplifying the numbers of dollar deposits. It is this procedure that created today what is known as the crisis of qualified and unchasted deposits.

All of these decisions, which caused direct losses of no less than $ 40 billion, participated in the manufacture of two parties: the state and its central bank, and scandals are continuing. There is no need to recall that the state is responsible in all cases for its bank. There is also no need to remember that the Central Council that runs the Bank of Lebanon has a government commissioner responsible for transferring what is going on to the government through the Ministry of Finance. It must be remembered that these decisions, foremost of which is the decision to support, is not clear from what it was taken, the government or the Bank of Lebanon, or the two together.

According to this concept, responsibilities should be determined, and in accordance with this distribution of responsibilities, losses should be distributed to compensate for depositors, and restore rights to their owners.