The conflict over the presidency of the Libyan Intelligence Service turned into an open confrontation between the President of the Presidential Council, Mohamed Al-Manfi, and the presidency of the agency, in which judicial rulings overlap with a conflict of constitutional jurisdictions, and its repercussions extend to bank accounts and workers’ salaries.
In the latest developments in the crisis, the Public Prosecutor’s Office entered the conflict on Monday, sending letters to the Presidential Council, the head of the “National Unity” government, Abdul Hamid Al-Dabaiba, the Minister of Finance, Rashid Abu Ghafa, and the Governor of the Central Bank of Libya, Fawzi Abu Khuzam, asking them to adhere to the judicial rulings issued regarding the decisions to exempt Hussein Al-A’eb, assign Abdul Majeed Maligta, stop creating or approving new bank accounts in the name of the agency, and ensure the disbursement of the salaries of its members on time.
The addresses of Public Prosecutor Al-Siddiq Al-Sur come at a time when Al-A'ib is insisting on continuing as head of the agency, and rejects the decisions of the Presidential Council to relieve him and designate Mlegta as his successor, while Al-Manfi resorted to the Supreme Court to resolve the dispute, stressing that the authority to appoint the head of the agency and dismiss him falls within the powers of the Council.
The media center of the intelligence service had confirmed in a previous statement that the defector is the “legitimate president,” and rejected the decisions issued by the Presidential Council regarding changing him, considering that they violate Law No. (8) of 2023 regarding the reorganization of the intelligence service.
The statement accused unnamed parties of “unilaterally issuing promotion decisions,” which it said “included people whose employment relationship with the agency has ended, and others against whom disciplinary decisions have been issued or who face criminal cases.”
The agency said, in its statement, that promotion requires the existence of an existing functional relationship between the employee and the agency, warning that including names that do not meet these conditions represents “a violation of security and military discipline.” It also held the decisions issued by the Presidential Council responsible for “disrupting the payment of salaries of the agency’s employees.”
The agency’s presidency vowed to take legal measures against those responsible for the procedures it described as violating the law, and to address the judicial and regulatory authorities, most notably the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
On the other hand, Al-Manfi stressed in a letter addressed to the heads of sovereign institutions that the authority to appoint and dismiss the leadership of the intelligence service belongs to the Presidential Council, based on the Seventh Amendment to the Constitutional Declaration of 2014, the Libyan Political Agreement, and the documents of the Political Dialogue Forum.
He also accused the House of Representatives of “contradiction in its position on the political agreement,” and warned that the continuation of the conflicting measures might lead to the division of the intelligence service and the duplication of its management, in addition to depriving its employees of their salaries and job rights. He called on the Supreme Court to resolve the dispute quickly and finally, in a way that guarantees the unity of institutions and protects national security.
Al-Manfi believes that the decisions related to appointing the leadership of the agency fall within the acts of sovereignty, and that deciding the dispute regarding them falls within the jurisdiction of the constitutional judiciary, not the administrative judiciary, in a clear objection to relying on the rulings of the Courts of Appeal to invalidate the decisions of the Presidential Council.
The crisis dates back to June 28, when the Presidential Council announced the dismissal of Al-A'ib from the presidency of the intelligence service and appointed Mlegta as his successor, in addition to appointing Abdel Shafi Bouzalaa as deputy head of the intelligence service. The decision was issued with the approval of Al-Manfi and Council member Abdullah Al-Lafi, while the second member, Musa Al-Koni, objected to it.
The decision was not a consensus within the Presidential Council itself. Al-Koni said that he participated in the meeting via video call and objected to the appointment of Mlegta, stressing his disagreement with the decision.
In turn, the House of Representatives adhered to the continuation of the defector in his position, as its Speaker, Al-Salihin Abdel Nabi, confirmed in a recent letter to him that he would continue his duties as head of the agency, demanding that he continue to manage its departments, branches and units, considering that the decisions of the Presidential Council to relieve him and assign Mlegta did not fulfill the necessary constitutional and legal procedures.
The position of Al-A'ib and the House of Representatives is based on the law regulating the work of the agency and the powers of its presidency, and on judicial rulings issued during the past months, including the Benghazi Court of Appeal accepting the appeal submitted regarding the decisions to change the leadership of the agency and canceling the contested decisions. Last September, the Administrative Judiciary Department of the Zawiya Court of Appeal suspended the implementation of the decisions of the Presidential Council related to relieving Al-A'ib and assigning Mliqta and his deputy.
In parallel with the legal and political dispute, the confrontation moved to the management of the agency’s financial resources, after Al-Manfi demanded that the “unity” government open new bank accounts for the agency at the Al-Waha Bank and the Libyan Arab Foreign Bank, in coordination with Maligta, while freezing the previous accounts.
This raised objections related to the party legally authorized to manage and sign the accounts, especially in light of the defector’s continued exercise of his duties and his refusal to acknowledge the decision to relieve him, and Al-Koni’s objection to the measures taken to change the leadership of the agency.
