Libyans are not waiting for a president

Even if we had a collective parliament representing political factions, tribes and regions from across Libya, it would be hard to imagine a Libyan president who could settle in any building in Tripoli, Benghazi´-or-Sabha and unite the vast, fragmented country under his constitutional authority.

The position of ‘Libyan president’ no longer exists. It was abolished by Muammar Gadhafi, who eliminated a political concept from a country that was unable to unite its disparate regions stretching from the Mediterranean coast to the Sahara in North Africa.

This is not because Libyans are inherently different when it comes to collective action, but because the parties and leaders that emerged after the collapse of Gadhafi’s regime do not represent the true essence of the Libyan people nor Libya as a state-;- rather, they reflect narrow, regional and tribal geographies.

In the 1990s, when the US imposed sanctions on Libya over the Lockerbie bombing, Western journalists and correspondents would be met with a sarcastic smile after asking about the location of the Libyan presidency. “We don’t have a president-;- we are a people who govern themselves,” Libyan officials would repetitively answer, without truly believing it.

Gadhafi considered himself to be above the role of president, which is why he opted for the modest title of ‘Brother Leader’. In reality, this was extreme fake humility, given that all decisions in Libya came from the ‘Leader’s Office’ and nowhere else. Meanwhile, he bestowed fictitious titles upon himself that were above any constitutional office, such as ‘Guardian of the Arab Nation’ and ‘King of Kings of Africa’, to insult the very notion of a president! He also refused to meet visiting heads of state at the airport, giving the absurd excuse that he was not the president of Libya.

So who was the president then? No one! But also, no one was above the Brother Leader. Was there a presidential´-or-republican palace? That is a question that completes the farcical political scene in Libya, which continued until Gaddafi’s death. Unfortunately, for Libyans, this farce continues as they still have not found someone they can consider their leader, whether through elections´-or-a relatively accepted consensus. This is also what the upcoming presidential elections, if they happen at all, will result in.

Libyans are not expecting to elect a president any time soon, because the concept of a president was eradicated when Gadhafi destroyed the idea of a state. None of the parties nor political movements that have emerged since then has been able to -restore- the Libyan state.

After Gadhafi’s death, the world discovered that there was no real presidential palace. Bab al-Azizia, as it was known, was merely a long fence surrounding an empty space with a few modest buildings, which now serve as shelters for displaced Libyans. Gadhafi despised every historical era that had a political leadership before him, yet ultimately he left Libya with nothing but a vast void in its political history.

In the mid-1990s, my late friend Abu al-Qasim al-Quwiri took me to meet Kamel Maghur, a lawyer and writer, on a sunny winter day in Tripoli. Having resigned from his positions as minister of oil and foreign minister, Maghur was tasked with acting as defence counsel for Al-Megrahi and Fhima in the Lockerbie case. We found him looking troubled and sad. A few days earlier, Gadhafi had driven through Tripoli, a city with grand Italian architecture, and, much to the detriment of Libyan architecture, he stopped in front of a magnificent Italian building that used to house one of the ministries during the monarchy. He angrily told those around him, ‘What has the revolution of the First of September done other than demolish the idols of the corrupt monarchy system? Who allowed you to keep this building standing to this day?’

The scene was as grim as could be the next day, when hammers of hatred and backwardness demolished the building. Only those who read Al-Mahqour’s autobiography, Stations: A Semi-Autobiography, would have understood. In it, he recounts the history of the Al-Dhahra area of Tripoli.

This is a chapter of Libyan history that Gadhafi destroyed, eliminating the concept of the presidential office and its role in the state. Today, Libya is searching for a leader who can make decisions that are respected. Yet all signs indicate that such an agreement is not likely to be reached in the near future.

Since the High National Election Commission in Libya announced the results of the first phase of the 2024 local elections, Libyans have been waiting to find out what will happen in the second phase, which has been postponed. However, they are not expecting any information about the presidential elections.

The statement by Abubakr Wamer, a member of the Libyan Election Commission, that the commission is technically ready to conduct presidential and parliamentary elections offers little hope, given the lack of consensus between the eastern and western Libyan factions.

Meanwhile, questions have been raised about the future of the upcoming UN roadmap to resolve the Libyan crisis and push towards elections, following the recent briefing by the UN envoy to Libya, Hanna Tetteh, in which she attacked all Libyan parties.

The envoy delivered a detailed and insightful briefing to the UN Security Council, criticising all Libyan parties for hindering the elections, failing to approve a budget, while exacerbating chaos and instability.

Though the envoy’s call for immediate elections seemingly reflects a desire to break the political deadlock, it ignores the actual context of institutional division and the geographical and political separation between Tripoli and Benghazi.

The House of Representatives, which is based in Tobruk, is pushing to issue electoral laws without coordinating with the State Council. This is essentially recreating the scenario of armed conflict. Meanwhile, Khalifa Haftar, the leader of the parallel Libyan army, has the support of House Speaker Aguila Saleh to issue a presidential election law that would allow him to run for president while still wearing his military uniform.

Meanwhile, the UN-led Political Dialogue Forum is raising the contentious question of how the Libyan president should be elected: by popular vote´-or-by members of parliament?

The debate about who is eligible to run for president continues: dual citizens, military personnel and those who worked with Gadhafi’s regime are all up for discussion. There are also several potential candidates whose names are not widely accepted by the public: Khalifa Haftar, Abdulhamid Dbeibah, Saif al-Islam Gadhafi and Fathi Bashagha.

Furthermore, despite their exaggerated optimism, none of these candidates embodies “presidential dignity”, either before´-or-after winning. Nothing suggests that Libya is heading towards fair and transparent elections based on a constitution and mutually-agreed laws. Therefore, Libyans are not expecting to elect a president anytime soon, as the concept of the state was destroyed the moment Gadhafi came to power, and none of his successors in politics and parties has been able to -restore- it.

Rate the article
Bad	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	Very good
Result : 100%							Participated in the vote : 1