The crisis of shaping the political system in Lebanon and the repercussions of internal conflicts on the constitutional framework

This study addresses the issue of political crises and national dialogue and their impact on the Lebanese constitutional system, based on the distinctive nature of the Lebanese constitutional experience and its close interrelationship between constitutional provisions, political practice, and sectarian balances. The study aims to clarify the limits of the role that national dialogue can play in addressing political crises and the extent to which it can contribute to developing constitutional practice without becoming a substitute for constitutional institutions or serving as a framework for re-establishing the state outside the mechanisms established by the Constitution. The study is based on the fundamental premise that Lebanon’s recurring political crises are not solely related to deficiencies in constitutional provisions, but are primarily connected to the manner in which these provisions are interpreted and applied, as well as to the nature of the political system and the mechanisms through which consensus is achieved within it. It also examines the impact of national dialogue conferences and political settlements in addressing constitutional crises, while distinguishing between the conciliatory and political role of dialogue and the constituent function, which belongs exclusively to the people or to the constituent authority in accordance with constitutional procedures. The study concludes that national dialogue constitutes an important tool for managing Lebanese crises and effectively reducing the intensity of political divisions. However, its effectiveness remains contingent upon respect for the Constitution and constitutional institutions, and upon preventing political consensus from becoming a parallel source of constitutional legitimacy. It further emphasizes that addressing the crises of the Lebanese political system does not require replacing the Constitution with dialogue, but rather using dialogue as a means of reaching understandings that enable the Constitution to be implemented and developed within constitutional and legal frameworks. This would contribute to strengthening the stability of the state while preserving its legitimacy and the unity of its institutions.