How to fill the power vacuum?

This vacuity is in itself an exceptional anomalous situation because it empties an incumbent constitutional institution and spoils a sectarian balance that has been adopted on the distribution of power in a country, where no real state has been established so far. The best thing that has been originated in it is “a system of those who guard their special interests” in favor of domestic sides that had obtained parliamentary seats due to sectarian money and instincts, as well as outside interests in favor of foreign entities that considered that Lebanon is part of their vital strategic space and a field for their direct and indirect interests.   
 
In light of this grim reality, we should admit that if the authority in Lebanon did not live up to a national authority that maintains its existence and continuity, then the impact of abnormality may be different and lenient. Here it is necessary to highlight the practical power vacuum, even with the presence of people who occupy the seats, for power is not represented in a person, a chair, or a salary received by that person, but power is a function, tasks and obligations. If the authority did not fulfill its duties and obligations and practices its function for which it has been established, then the absence of its turnouts will be equivalent to their presence, but the absence here will be positive for it would stimulates people more to fulfill the responsibilities delegated for the authority originally so as to allow the building of the state. 

To indicate the power vacuum in Lebanon and the authority’s denial of its responsibilities, it seems we are forced to mention some examples that will not take us ten years back, but will take us to an era that we are living right now and considering and analyzing it push us to say that Lebanon is suffering from a case of vacancy in power, despite the presence of people in their seats in more than one constitutional or administrative and other institutions: 
Where was the authority on issues related to protecting the Lebanese territory from occupation and did the authority protect any land or prevent its occupation? Did it liberate any occupied territory and returned it to the Lebanese sovereignty! Everyone knows that the answer is no. If it weren’t of those Lebanese people who regulated and established a resistance that began with the stone and the boiling oil and developed until it become able to establish the equation of deterrence of the “Israeli” enemy, the land in 2000 would not have been liberated, and the occupation of the land would not have been prevented in 2006.
When the text of the resolution 1701 mentioned a political mechanism to liberate the Shebaa Farms the authority that is supposed to be present on a continuous basis since 8 years was absent, and it did nothing to liberate that land! However, it is funny to hear those who call for limiting the weapons to the authority only! What kind of authority is to monopolize weapons? Is it the authority that complies with the outside and fears it? Then, how would it use weapons in light of its current existing corrosion, decomposition, and deterioration? 
Where has this authority been in issues relating to protecting the national fixed rights of Lebanon that were listed in international conventions and treaties! We refer here to the two issues, for example, the first is the issue of the truce agreement with the enemy “Israel”, through which the state imposed a reality and remained stuck to it only just, and the second is the issue of the international border. Everyone knows that Lebanon’s relations with the “Israeli” enemy is organized by the truce agreement, is monitored by the system of the United Nations Observers, and is coordinated by the Military Armistice Commission (MAC), which is composed of Lebanese and “Israeli” officers, as well as of officers and observers from the Commission to monitor the truce. Yet, “Israel” canceled the Convention on its own ever since 1969, occupied the Shabaa farms, dropped the armistice line, and exceeded the Commission to monitor the truce. Then, the Lebanese authority came to reward “Israel” on what it did and was aware of its steps implicitly so it established along with it a trilateral military commission after 2006 that is not based on an agreement or an international resolution. Here we ask: what is the justification on which the Lebanese authority relied to waive this much? Shouldn’t it rather return to the armistice agreement and its requirements? Also, how the authority uses in its political literature and diplomatic correspondence the phrase the “Blue Line” and deals with it as if it is destined and turns a blind eye to the international border and the armistice line mirroring it? 

Moreover, why the Lebanese authority did not protect its people, emphasize the sovereignty of the Lebanese law on its territory, and disclaim safeguarding the rights of the citizens and their freedoms? What is the Lebanese authority’s position on what happened in Hague when in a shocking event a Lebanese journalist has been called on the basis of an accusation that affects the freedom of the press in Lebanon! She was summoned to a foreign court that is considered an international one, where more than half of the Lebanese people do not recognize its legitimacy. The reporter stood there unarmed lacking any power except the power of truth and the weapon of logic to defend herself when its country’s authority did not protect her and did not protect the freedom of opinion and media, as stipulated by the Constitution! 

Where the authority that should do justice to the people, should do justice to the employees, and should do justice to the military personnel in their rights and their livelihood is? Where is the authority when most of the parliamentary blocs work against these rights, which have no supporters left but only the representatives of the few sect that defended the freedom and independence of Lebanon as well as its sovereignty. The true defend and not the verbal false and hypocritical one? They are the representatives of the community of resistance exclusively who championed the oppressed against the injustice of the whales of money. Where is the authority when the future of students in their current educational year is threatened? Where is that authority which its deputies met to agree on depriving the rights of the hungry employee and those who swallowed those rights, confiscated the wealth of the state, and stole it became indulged in excessively?
 
The problem in Lebanon is not a vacancy in the presidency chair, any president or any administrative chair, any administration, or public facility, but the problem is much far than this. It is mainly a problem of state-building and building the National Authority that represents the people and not the one that acts on the people, usurps their power and wealth, abandons the sovereignty, and underestimates the rights. This authority has one single way in to be formed and it should not be exceeded i.e. an election law that allows the people to choose their representatives and allows them to hold them accountable in the next election, then the authority will belong to the people and will emerge from the people and not be imposed or confiscate the people’s decision. At that time, any vacuum would be regretted and filling it shall be urgent and necessary as to be avoided to the maximum possible degree, though this vacancy basically will not happen according to what I think. 

It is the only way towards the solution that is represented in the election law that depends on the relative base and applies in all Lebanon on the basis of the same constituency away from the power of money and the sectarian instincts. Based upon this, the one responsible for the vacancy, the loss of rights, and the waste of sovereignty is the one preventing any access to the election law. Stop then lying and deceiving. Accordingly, would the people pressure to reach to this law or would continue to lament the authority in a vacuum or power vacuum that do not give Lebanon any welfare but would take it steps backward?