Source: Amin Gemayel, Rebuilding Lebanon, University Press of America, 1992.
Denominationalism may have helped build the Lebanese state, but it cannot help it develop. It should be progressively eliminated and institutions be created that are not religiously based. Christians and Muslims will continue to live together in Lebanon, and the dialogue between the two communities must continue as part of Lebanon’s destiny. But the impact of religion on politics must be diminished. Guarantees must be provided so that Christian‐Islamic harmony will remain the foundation of the Lebanese experience. Although the solution to this problem requires the elimination of religious sectarianism from politics, any attempt to make a quick change to a secular system would face many obstacles, both psychological and
traditional. Even the school of thought that advocates a planned progression to a non‐sectarian system risks exacerbating religious sentiment and transforming it into some form of fundamentalism. A better solution
would include the following three steps.
First, an open, democratic political system would be established in which the criteria for election of the President of the Republic, the president of the Council of Ministers, the president (speaker) of Parliament, and the deputies would not be religious. Then free elections would enable citizens to make their choices untroubled by community pressures. Second, the denominational criteria for recruitment to the civil service would be eliminated as soon as possible. It would be wise, however, to maintain a temporary balance at the most senior level. Third, a Senate representing the regions and local authorities would be created.
The principle underlying this policy is the maintenance of a harmonious balance between the democratic running of the institutions and respect for Lebanon’s pluralism. This balance is possible if legal safeguards are put in place to ensure that no one party can impose its views on the others, particularly in relation to electing a President, controlling laws in the Senate, and dividing administrative duties between the state and the regional units. [p. 8]
…
Parliament: Senate and Chamber of Deputies. The two houses of Parliament would serve as a counterweight to the president.
The upper house, the Senate, would be elected by universal suffrage in the regions, with senators representing different regional units. The Senate would give each motion passed by the lower house a second reading, reflect on issues, and safeguard the political balance. It would consider questions bearing on the future of the country and would pronounce on all questions relating to laws on public freedom, laws modifying personal status, electoral laws, economic planning, international treaties and conventions, and it would declare a state of emergency, general mobilization, and war. The Senate’s agreement would be necessary to nominate senior civil servants. Senators would be elected for six years and one third of them would be elected every two years.
The primary responsibility of the lower house, the Chamber of Deputies, would be to carry out the political will of the Lebanese people through legislation. It could give the Government (the Council of Ministers) a
vote of confidence, but it could also withdraw that confidence if it did not approve of the Government’s policies. In order to weaken the religious mentality and bring forward political majorities, the deputies would be elected from national lists by adjusted proportional representation. The President would have the right‐not more than once a year‐to dissolve the Chamber of Deputies in cases of conflict.
Changes in the Constitution would require the approval of a two‐thirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate. [p. 9]
