Last Saturday, Hizbullah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, spoke about the indictment of four party members in the assassination six years ago of Rafik Hariri, Lebanon’s former prime minister. I think merit and credibility should be given to Nasrallah’s argument that the court is a sham and is highly politicized. Hizbullah has presented evidence of corruption and political interference that is substantial enough that it would have thrown out this case in any court in the Western world.

The case presented by the STL is simply a prima facie case for criminal liability. This is a very low standard, and should not imply any guilt. All it means is that the prosecutors have done the absolute minimum of showing that there is a possible scenario where those indicted could have been involved in some way. This is such a low standard that it means almost nothing, particularly in the absence of direct evidence, which is generally recognized by everyone.

The only “evidence” against Hizbullah is a group of operatives using Lebanese telecommunication networks, which Israel has been able to penetrate with its devices in the past. Nasrallah has mentioned before that they had evidence that Israel was surveying the area where the explosion went off. Assuming that was true, which is very plausible, then that would be reason a’plenty to show that Hizbullah was in the area at the time, using secure communications methods. An indictment would easily rest on political arguments, which is essentially nothing. I am also very curious about how these prosecutors actually carried out their investigations. From all that has transpired in the investigation since 2005, I’m expecting their documents of evidence, if any, to smell like the most expensive cigars, be stained with the most expensive red wines and champagnes, and be littered with the glitter falling off the most expensive dancing strippers that Lebanon has to offer.

My main problem with the whole process is how the STL started receiving cooperation from Israel during its investigation, and completely gave a blind eye and deaf ear to all the evidence that was presented by Nasrallah about the possibility of Israel’s involvement in Hariri’s assassination. Now whether you like Israel or Hizbullah is irrelevant, this action by the STL was indefensible. Would you want someone who wants to destroy you to “cooperate” in investigations against you?

Six years ago, several distinguished Lebanese officials lost years of their lives in jail to find out that the evidence against them was circumstantial, so why should Hizbullah hand over its men and subject them to the same demise? Why should Nasrallah abide by the rules of a court that is smeared with Israeli and Western intelligence fingerprints whose arbiters who are sworn enemies of his group? Does anyone really think that if these men faced a fair trial and were found innocent of this particular crime that they will be allowed to return to Lebanon to resume their normal activities?

I see no option in this matter for Hizbullah, legal or not, since there is no judicial review board or external institution to review whether this entire system is fair; it makes sense that Hizbullah would seek to avoid a trial that they believe is biased against them. Whether they are right or wrong would only be determined by the trial itself. At that point it would be far too late. Thus, their actions seem reasonable to me.

The view of Hizbullah doesn’t have to be correct that the court is irredeemable to have a strong justification for not believing that it is fair. If it wasn’t for the powerful force that Hizbullah represents against the Israeli and American project in the Middle East, this crime would have been just another footnote in the sorry history of this little exploited nation.

Public opinion is what matters in Lebanon, not the details of the court. What a full-fledged war could not achieve in 2006, the court is now trying to achieve through civil strife. And no Lebanese would risk such an outcome given the deep doubts behind the court’s motivations. Remember, this comes at a time when WikiLeaks and revolutions have proven Arabs’ worst fears and conspiracies to not be far-fetched at all and everything is possible. It is not just the Lebanese who see this process as utter deception and anything but “justice” to the fallen; I have met people with legal backgrounds who are high ranking UN officials who are extremely critical of the whole proceedings of STL, based on what they know from internal deliberations.

Therefore, it was very sad to see March 14 politicians referred to Nasrallah as a mobster and a bully. There is nothing wrong with criticizing Nasrallah’s speech, but I will ask these politicians to please spare us from their sanctimonious comments. They talk as if they respect the rule of law and all of a sudden Nasrallah is breaking our exceptional justice system in Lebanon by refusing to give up his men to an impotent and toothless court. The whole Lebanese political system is full of criminals who never had to face any trials or tribunals for crimes too atrocious to name. Let’s be serious and cut the charade. It’s a sad day for Lebanon and I must also add, it’s a sad day for anyone even remotely connected to this sham of a tribunal.