The Case in Brief

Nour Merheb is a Lebanese citizen. civil rights advocate and a Nonviolent Human Rights defender.

Upon going out of his office on 07/02/2008, Nour was assaulted by a person named “J.Z.” because of a dispute that arose in the building where he (Nour) worked. Nour did his best to defend himself against the aggressor, but he got severally beaten. His injuries required him first to go to a medical examiner and then he directly headed to file a complaint before the competent authority- the military police- after he found out that “J.Z.” was in the military.
In the investigation conducted by the military police, the aggressor “J.Z.” claimed that Nour held out a knife against him, what lead him to assault him in self defense. Nour refuted this allegation deeming it a false accusation- knowing that no proof was brought forward to support the allegation of “J.Z.”.
The military police ran an investigation on the subject and held officer “J.Z.” responsible, as mentioned in the following report made by adjutant Ahmad Ismail from the military police:
“It was concluded from the whole investigation that the officer “J.Z.” stepped into a dispute he was not concerned in, especially that he is a member in the committee of the building where he resides and he came to blows with the so-called Merheb.

The investigation did not find that the latter held out a knife against him – Officer “J.Z.” number: xxxxx, from the General Inspectorate at the Ministry of Defense, shall hold the following responsibility: – on 07/02/2008, in the area of New Rawda, he came to blows with a civilian, not to mention that he is also a member of the building committee and he interferes in its affairs without any right.”

In contrary to the principles and rules of justice, the forces of power and oppression played their usual game and instead of prosecuting the officer, the army command, chiefs of staff and discipline and military justice, represented by Lieutenant Colonel Said, and after going back to the military prosecution office, decided to collect the hearing fees and the compensation for the suspension of officer “J.Z.”. The decision was put into effect on 07/07/2008 and Nour was ordered to pay the amount of 2,468,00 LBP.

Nour was surprised upon hearing the verdict and objected to it for he was the victim and not the defendant. He did not accept to pay, and was therefore accused, without any evidence, of threatening the officer with a knife and of disabling him for six weeks because of a broken finger. Nour was accused according to articles 557 and 573 of the penal law and 73 of the weapons law, with accusations punishable with imprisonment for up to three years. Moreover, Nour was referred to the permanent military court without appearing before an examining magistrate and without the submission of list of accusations that presents the evidence or proofs with which the general military prosecution, represented by Mr. “Sader”, supported its case.
Nour attended the military court hearings, testified and was subject to numerous abuses and violations. But, he finally managed to prove that “J.Z.” did not see a knife in his hand, through the confession of “J.Z.” himself, who reiterated this statement several times since the first court hearing. However, his statement was not recorded in the minutes of the hearing despite Nour’s persistent requests for it to be recorded until the hearing dated 01/22/2010, after Nour insisted before the judge. Yet, as it later turned out, the confession recorded in the minutes differed from the confession expressed by the officer and was somehow ambiguous.

In spite of that, the said statement is still considered a clear confession and must be considered sufficient evidence before the court to prove the contradiction in the officer’s statements in this concern. It states the exact following:
“The defendant “J.Z.” was questioned and he added saying: “I did not see a knife in Nour’s hand. However, after I went home, my brother-in-law told me he saw him pick his knife up from the ground and put it on his waist.”

After he succeeded in making officer “J.Z.” himself confess that there were no knife, and since he did not have faith in the military court, nor did he trust it to be impartial, knowledgeable, capable and honest, and to declare his innocence; and given the injustice he suffered by being prosecuted without due reasons; given the fact that he was treated as guilty while the officer was treated in a preferential way throughout the brief proceedings; and considering that the judge prevented Nour from talking and defending himself during the hearings at numerous occasions; and given that he proved his innocence by the confession of officer “J.Z.” himself (while originally, guilt should be proven and not innocence!!!); based on the aforementioned, Nour considers that the military court is unfair and illegitimate, and does not respect his right as a human being and his right, as a Lebanese citizen, to a fair and impartial trial that is provided for in the Constitution and in international covenants.

Accordingly, he has refused to cooperate with the military court as from 05/28/2010, and did not attend the hearing that was supposed to be held at that date, although he risked that an arrest warrant be issued against him and he be incarcerated. Nour also declared that he will not run away and that he will be present at his known place of residence. However, he will fight the evil and oppression caused by the military court by declaring his insubordination and non-cooperation, armed with human conscience and the truth.
Nour, who is innocent until the opposite is proved, and who was proven innocent by virtue of the investigation that was conducted by the military police and finally by the confession of the aggressor himself, endured what every other Lebanese citizen might endure, and for the silliest reasons. Therefore, Nour considers based on what his conscience compels him to do, that it is his duty as a human being and as a Lebanese citizen to stop cooperating with the military court and to declare it illegitimate, according to the Lebanese Constitution, the international covenants and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and that by refusing to cooperate with injustice, oppression, evil and abuse of power.
The stand that Nour, the human rights activist, took is an opportunity to demand openly the abolition of the military court and to object to its injustice, especially after the final verdict it issued on September 1, 2010, knowing that the said court ruled against Nour Merheb and sentenced him to two months of imprisonment and with payment of a fine of one hundred thousand Lebanese pounds.
Nour refuses to submit to the military court orders that he deems illegitimate. He refuses to cooperate or even defend himself before it and he demands the Lebanese State and the Parliament to abolish the competences of the military courts immediately. Nour did not run away. He is present at his house in Dbayeh and he will conduct a series of activities in the coming days to mobilize the forces required to demand the abolishment of military courts in Lebanon, while awaiting his arrest, which he will confront with nonviolent noncooperation methods.

Register your email address to get notified of every breaking news on this case.

For more information, click on one of the following links:

The letter that was sent to the military Court declaring its illegitimacy

The first press release (24-year-old Lebanese Man Declares Illegitimacy of Military Court, declares His Non-Compliance with Its Orders and Threatens to Go on an Open Hunger Strike)

The first press conference (FOUNDATION FOR HUMAN AND HUMANITARIAN RIGHTS – LEBANON” for a press conference on Special Tribunals in Lebanon)

The second Press Release ( The Permanent Military Court in Lebanon Ruled With Two Months In Prison And A Fine On The Human Rights Activist Nour Merheb. Nour Merheb: The military court is not neutral and its decision in my case is another proof on the injustice that the Lebanese citizens are enduring)