Al-Senussi Ismail: The international veto is the main reason for disrupting the elections, and the legitimacy of Libyan institutions is “eroded.”
The former spokesman for the Supreme Council of the Muslim Brotherhood, “The State Advisory Council,” Al-Senussi Ismail, confirmed that the international veto is the main reason for disrupting the elections, and disrupting any Libyan-Libyan agreements that lead us to a political settlement and a new government.
Ismail pointed out, during his interview with the “Libya Al-Ahrar” channel, that the Libyan people cannot accept being ruled by a dictator and will overthrow him even if after many years, explaining that King Idris was a dictator and excluded parties, criminalized them, froze the political process, and excluded all opponents from the country.
He pointed out that the Libyans do not want a just dictator or an unjust dictator. They only want a peaceful transfer of power, explaining that bringing together all security, military and political parties to form a single government is vital for holding elections, and it is difficult to solve the problems of division without achieving this.
He continued that the legitimacy of all Libyan institutions has been greatly eroded, and this is clear to everyone due to the worsening economic and security crises in the country, adding that the multiple international interference in the Libyan scene threatens the sovereignty of the state amid the inability of the Libyan parties to unify the frameworks of the state and form a unified government.
He stressed that this crisis has existed since 2014, and has escalated significantly in Geneva, and we cannot imagine holding elections in the presence of two governments as some are trying to promote, explaining that the House of Representatives and the State have eroded legitimacy, but they are stronger than the rest of the institutions and cannot be bypassed in forming the government.
He concluded by saying that the rule of law in Libya is weak, and the judiciary cannot be involved in Libyan political problems, and any talk about a group of judges assuming responsibility for managing elections instead of the current governments and bodies is unrealistic.
