Chapter 12, Part 3: The Years of Anxiety: The Martial Law Debate

Because of the depth of the disagreement over the philosophy of government, I would like to quote passages from what the deputies of the two sides said.

It was I who opened the debate on martial law, with a calm speech I gave at the session of 19 April 1957, in which I called on the government "to wipe out the third sunn pest".

At the start of the session the deputies had spoken of two kinds of sunn pest: the pest that ravages the crops and the pest that ravages people's pockets.. I spoke of "the pest that ravages people's freedoms, which is martial law.." and said that Legislative Decree No. 150, then in force, was beyond doubt a law that contravened the provisions of the Constitution, but that it had stayed in force because an exceptional article of the Constitution, Article 163 of the 1950 Constitution, had kept it alive.[1]

I said in my speech that if there was some interest in keeping the state of emergency for the sake of the higher interest of the state, it should be confined to the areas along the border with Israel, for instance.

But it must not remain over the whole of the homeland, and permanently. Nor does it help the opposing view to say that martial law was introduced to fight conspirators, because the ordinary laws are able to do that job, and indeed they exist for that very job.

I said in this speech: "The criminals who terrorize people and plant explosives in safe public neighborhoods, to frighten the men and fill the women and children with dread.. are not discovered. An example is these explosives thrown recently at the headquarters of the People's Party."

And I reminded the government that we "were not fighting to the death for power, as some deputies think; quite the opposite. It was we who made it easier for this government to come into being, when we abstained from voting at the confidence session.. so that it could win."

Rashad Barmada attacked the continuation of martial law, saying:

"We do not find ourselves protected under it."

Muhammad al-Mubarak (representing the Muslim Brotherhood) said.. "The view I am convinced of, and which I believe represents the people or the majority of them, is that martial law must be abolished.. Among the people I meet nothing but surprise that it remains, since there is no longer anything to justify it."

The deputy Abd al-Karim Zuhur defended it, saying: "There are brothers who call for martial law to be lifted in good faith. But there are others who know themselves to be conspirators, and so they fear martial law.. whereas a man with a clear patriotic conscience fears no one but God.. As for the other kind, ask the man with a black soul and evil intent, who walks with conspiracy and the conspirators."

Qadri al-Mufti also defended it, saying: "We, sir, have not heard of any abuse by state officials in which they exploited martial law.."

Khalid Bakdash, head of the Communist Party,[2] defended it too, saying: "We must not say that martial law in Syria has been against the Syrian people.. on the contrary, it has supported them, and affection between the people and the army has grown under it."

Mazhar al-Sharbaji defended it as well. It was a shameful stand for a man of the law like him. At this session Rushdi al-Kikhya gave a long speech in which he dealt with martial law and laid before the deputies everything he thought about the disquieting internal situation.

In his speech he said the following:

"Martial law is usually imposed in exceptional circumstances, as happened when it was imposed on the day of the brutal aggression against our big sister Egypt, and everyone, without exception, took part in approving its declaration at that time.

Now, however, we believe that the reasons that called for declaring martial law have gone.. Israel, which stands in the heart of the Arab lands, is the greatest danger to them.

If we put such a thing in our scales, it would mean that martial law must stay until colonialism disappears from the world and Israel disappears from existence.

But can we put a time, short or long, on this precious hope? The recent history of this country, that is, since the Ottoman state withdrew from it and it was occupied by foreign armies, tells us and shows us who defended the freedom and dignity of the country and who went along with colonialism and rode in its train.. and waged relentless war on this nation. We know them and can point to them.. It is better for us, and for our national interest, to close this subject, so as not to lay bare the past with its tragedies and disgraces.. If we call for martial law to be abolished, we do so sincerely, not for any personal aim or party gain.

Our colleague Khalid Bakdash says that we grow restless when we are kept away from power, and he knows that the premiership, and what is greater than the premiership, was in our hands; indeed it was offered to us twice, three and four times, and we did not rush at it or scramble to reach it; rather, we turned it down.. Martial law can never put an end to intrigues and conspiracies, for history has taught us that iron and fire cannot stifle the voice of peoples or put an end to the intrigues that colonialism weaves. Rather, the awareness of the people is the only guarantee, the sure means of putting an end to conspiracies and intrigues of every kind. The people's attachment to their Chamber, their government and their system, and their confidence that the government applies the law equally to all, are the sure means of putting an end to conspiracies and to Zionist intrigues and their crimes.."

The Prime Minister, Sabri al-Asali, spoke, saying: ".. The situation that was the reason for imposing martial law still exists, and we sincerely hope that this distress will pass and that things will ease.. Speaking as a citizen, not as Prime Minister, I say that the heavy weight of martial law in this country was only for the public safety, and it was not approved to serve those in power or for the sake of a party.. And I hope from the bottom of my heart that the distress will lift, and that we and you, God willing, will be supporters of freedom, safety and the independence of the country.."

These words were not surprising from Sabri al-Asali, seated on the couch of the premiership, which was rocking beneath him under the shadow of the accusations that threatened him!

Mr. Ahmad Qanbar answered him, saying:

"I want to speak as a deputy elected by the nation to speak in its name, not as a member of the People's Party, so I declare before you that I have resigned from the executive bureau of the People's Party and resigned from the People's Party.. because I want to deal with the question of martial law free of every party tie, and so that the responsibility for my words rests on my own shoulders.. And because the subject is long, I ask the Chair to set aside a session or two for it.. (it was then half past two in the morning).."

At the next session (on 9 April 1957), Ahmad Qanbar spoke again: Martial law was declared at a time when Syria stood ready to come to the aid of our big sister Egypt after the brutal aggression on her, and we might have entered a war against her aggressors. It is well known that martial law is imposed only when order in the country is disturbed and the ordinary laws and ordinary courts cannot decide cases within a few days; then martial law is declared, so that judgments under it achieve the purpose intended, which is repression, the stabilizing of security and its restoration.

Mr. Speaker:

Martial law is declared when there is a revolt in one of the country's regions.. it is declared when there is unbridled strife in the country.. because it is harsh and has consequences that press hard on citizens, stifle them, limit their freedoms and suspend many provisions of the Constitution.

Martial law was declared here during the aggression on Egypt and continued until the aggression ended. When the Prime Minister was asked to lift it, he said he could not lift it until the foreign armies had left Egypt and the Israeli army had left Sinai.. All these armies have indeed left, but martial law has not been abolished here.. Dates were set for abolishing it, and then not kept, which makes us believe that there is a serious interest in its continuing and remaining. Is keeping it in the interest of the state? Or in the interest of security? Or in the interest of the country's reputation? My answer is no, because the existence of martial law gives a clear impression, at home and abroad, that things in the country are not running normally.. Every country in the world is exposed to the activity of spies. Every country in the world is exposed to conspiracies and conspirators. If that is to be made a reason for declaring martial law, and the country needs to impose it again, it takes no more than half an hour.. because the Council of Ministers can meet at any moment and issue a decree declaring it.. or abolishing it.

But if the matter were only a legal one, it would not call for all this uproar, this quarreling and wrangling. But the subject has another side, not a legal one, which all the deputies and all the ministers know.. Martial law concentrates powers in the military governor and in the bodies the Council of Ministers sets up on the military governor's proposal.

Yesterday I heard in this Chamber cries of treason.. and conspiracy.. It was clear that these words were aimed at some deputies of this Chamber, and it is for this purpose that it is said martial law must stay.

The charge of conspiracy, treason and dealing with foreigners is nothing new in this Chamber; it was said before, whatever was said, before the Eisenhower plan.. or the Baghdad Pact.. or the English French aggression on Egypt came into being.. They are old.. They are words that come to the tongues of some deputies like a registered trademark of theirs, which they let loose on every occasion and on none. Yet an honorable man would rather cut out his own tongue than level so ugly a charge without foundation, because it is no light thing to strip a man of the noblest of his sacred values.

I tell you that whoever calls for respect for public and individual freedoms is calling for the provisions of the Constitution to be applied.. and every constitution in the world was written to protect these freedoms.

If the Prime Minister and the deputies who support him think that martial law must continue, it is because they know the circumstances that brought them to power.. Perhaps the Prime Minister remembers saying once that he threatened to commit suicide if martial law remained. So why does he now call for it to continue? We know that the Penal Code punishes physical torture severely. And under martial law many people are now being tortured in various parts of the country.

He answered Khalid Bakdash, who had asked: what torture is this, by saying to him: "Mr. Bakdash, you of all the deputies know most about torture and the tortured, and you of all people know most about the methods of torture, where they were learned, how they are carried out and in whose interest they are carried out. A number of your brother deputies cannot come to Damascus and cannot attend the sessions of the Chamber of Deputies.. because they do not dare..

The Council of Ministers meets to amend some laws, and shouts and cries go up that it must not do so, and the Council of Ministers is threatened with every kind of threat.. These words may sound laughable, but it is laughter like weeping.. I am not afraid to name things, even though I know the consequences of naming them. Many threats have been made against me and others.. And these circumstances must be exposed, for the country's sake.."

The truth must be told: this government does not want to lift martial law because the majority that gave it its confidence was gathered together by means of martial law.. And if the threat that exists must be made clear, it is enough for me to say that His Excellency the Prime Minister himself was a victim of the threats.

No one has any doubt that martial law has been exploited against the people's interest, against their freedoms and against their reputation at home and abroad.. There is a group of citizens in the country who want, under this regime, to impose a kind of terror on citizens for personal exploitation or party gain.. And this can be seen in many parts of Syria.."

Wahib al-Ghanim commented on the question of martial law, saying: "Only criminals, traitors and those who play with this country's interest fear martial law. Had they not felt that they were steeped in treachery, they would not have stayed away. It would have been better for them to die innocent and honorable in the depths of the prisons than to flee to another homeland.."

Nothing could be more astonishing than these words, coming from a deputy and a fighter known for his clean, and moderate, political views.

Ahmad Qanbar spoke again, saying:

"Foreign and Arab policy is not a matter of dispute between us.. The government's supporters say they are fighting the Baghdad Pact, but who in this country has called for the Baghdad Pact? Who differs over the struggle against the Israeli danger? What causes the dispute is these voices raised in the Chamber for party purposes, seeking to turn the army against other parties.. It is the bad internal situation.. whose badness every citizen knows."

It was one of the stormy sessions, which showed who wanted the citizen's freedom and dignity, and who wanted to call on every hidden force in order to stay on the political stage.. because they had no solid base to stand on before the people. It is a pity that the debates in the Chamber of Deputies and in the press took an ugly turn, because they no longer served the Constitution and the law, but rather the harming of particular individuals, and the striking of their party through striking them.

Endnotes:

[1] This legislative decree was abolished in the days of the union and replaced by Emergency Law No. 162 of 27/9/1958; this law was then abolished by Legislative Decree No. 51 of 22/12/1962, which was amended by Legislative Decree No. 1 of 9/2/1963.

[2] He was the only communist deputy in the Chamber of Deputies. The communists never had another deputy.
Even so, he had influence, which he drew from his ties with the Soviet Union and with certain loyal officers. This is clear from what Khalid al-Azm wrote about the meetings of "the leaders" at his house to decide what served "the public good", in his wretched phrase.