Once upon a time, there was a country called Lebanon, whose legislature passed a law, after much waiting, on 8 December 2006, titled “National Production Protection Law.”

We will explain to the reader, who lives in a country where Gaz Oil costs only L.L1430 per liter possibly reaching L.L.1500 before the end of March. Indeed, this genuine country, a founding member of the League of Arab States, is considered the “spoiled child,” loved by everyone and attracting many who desire to have a Pied-a-Terre in it.

Our Arab brothers adore our country and have given it plenty, and there are no Lebanese who do not respect and love our brothers, whose aid is quite visible.

But our brothers produce Gaz Oil and sell it to their citizens at less than a tenth of its price in Lebanon! Is this a form of subsidy to local manufacturers ? Yes, according to the views of the whole world, the WTO, and the European Association Agreement. But, according to the Minister of Economy and Trade in Lebanon, this may be a subsidy but not a real one and we’re making a big fuss out of it. He is challenging us to bring our case to the Consultative Council. We will, but will not challenge anyone because we are unwavering and “right is might.” We will bring our case to the Lebanese people, requiring those who are deeply rooted here to voice their opinion before the Consultative Council delivers a judgment, based on logic, objectivity, and removed of political bias.

As to the one who is challenging us, we say that, we industrialists are not used to anyone challenging us in our right. We also remind the challenger that cutting off people’s livelihoods is similar to cutting off their lives. We are this land’s children. Governments come and go, but we persevere on the land of our ancestors. No one can make us leave! We will stay to be productive and safeguard the “Made in Lebanon” motto.

It seems that the Minister is convinced about the non-feasibility of industry in Lebanon; his belief has been manifested in his performance, and has kept him from being an impartial point of reference for all the economic activities in Lebanon. In this regard, the Minister has frequently and explicitly appealed to industrialists to relocate from Lebanon.

It is bizarre for a minister of economy to be in opposition to the productive sectors, in times when the regional and international orientation goes towards the development of productive sectors. In fact, it is commonly believed that a solid economic base lays the foundation for a strong economy. That’s why National Production Protection laws have been set and adopted by many countries that want to preserve their productive capacities. Nowadays, these laws have become unified through the World Trade Organization, and even with the Arab Free Trade. All the laws have been set to protect the industry that the Minister wants to displace. However, these laws have not been in effect in Lebanon since the year 2000, when we decided to adopt principles of absolute Liberalism and free competition.

The law is primarily supposed to protect national production from the harmful practices of international trade. It is also meant to fight dumping of subsidized imports. Most importantly, this law is one of the conditions set by the World Trade Organization, and without it Lebanon would not be allowed to join the organization.

Moreover, growing industries must be protected and preserved. Thus, every country, within the regulations of the world trade, has the right to protect and preserve its developing industries in a determined period of time and on clear basis.

The regional and international orientation towards the protection of national production has come into effect, as manifested by the latest movement in Europe whose aim was to take preventive measures against energy-intensive industries from Arab countries, and against electronics industries, cotton clothing, clothes, and other products from China. The objective is to protect production, under the rules of the World Trade Organization, and to take firm action in fighting subsidies, that will inevitably lead to evident unfair competition.

In its first section, the National Production Protection Law, published on 8 December 2006 in the Official Gazette, stipulates in Article 1: “This law applies to world trade practices that harm or threaten to damage local industry or agriculture, or that delay the establishment of budding local industry and agriculture. Those practices include cases of dumping and subsidizing an agricultural or industrial product that will be exported to Lebanon, subsidized by the government of the exporting parties.

The law also applies to cases of import increases that cause serious damage to local industry or agriculture in Lebanon and necessitate preventive measures to be taken.”

On the other hand, since this law was enacted by Parliament, its implementation helps protecting the national economy, especially the industrial sector from the damage caused by the above-mentioned practices. Thus, it protects from:
exporting to Lebanon at a price lower than the wholesale selling price in the country of origin
exporting to Lebanon at a price lower than that of exportation to a third country
exporting to Lebanon at a price lower than that of production cost
subsidizing the production costs in the countries exporting to Lebanon
the increase of imports of the products of a similar manufacture in Lebanon

The World Trade Organization, as well as all the agreements in which Lebanon is involved- and whose aim is to provide fair competition- give way to the above mentioned procedures.

Some believe that Lebanese production does not need the protection of this law, since the support in most Arab countries is a right bestowed by God, and we must accept the will of God the Great and Almighty.
When we were asked about the reason why this law has not been applied so far, the answer was that the regulative decree of the National Production Protection Law has been endorsed at the Council of Ministers on October 9th, 2007, but one Minister has refused to sign it.

Ironically, this so long-awaited law, presently suspended, remains a shelter protecting the Ministry of Economy and Trade and preventing it from carrying out its duties. For after the National Production Protection Law was issued, the MoET was no longer able to implement preventive measures on any of the agricultural or industrial products without investigations that comply with the regulations of this law. The industrialists are asked to believe this official story.

It is known that the National Production Protection Law, in Article 2, calls for temporary procedures- that prevent damage or threatened damage during the investigation (in cases of damage and support)- to be taken, such as a temporary increase in custom duties, in cases of increase of imports.

In other words, the Ministry of Economy and Trade can take temporary measures permitted by the law, even before the regulative decrees are issued - that the ministry should have proposed in a period that does not exceed three months after the law was enacted. This latter point is mentioned verbatim in Article 10 of the law: “The Council of Ministers issues, upon the request of the Minister of Economy and Trade, a decree defining the local industry and agriculture, as well as their official representatives.

In its multiple forms, dumping is considered a prominent phenomenon within the frame of the free circulation of merchandise and services (that the World Trade Organization endeavors to achieve). Countries exposed to dumping might have their productive sectors damaged. However, the laws of the WTO state that dumping must be fought and the people inflicted with damage must be compensated. That should nevertheless be done within specific legal frame to prove that damage did occur.

The Ministry of Economy and Trade does not abide by the spirit of the National Production Protection Law, although the few experiences in the preservation of national industries have proven to be a brilliant success, and can thus be considered models to follow among all national industries.

For example, even though the cement industry enjoys protection, its prices did not increase at the expense of the Lebanese consumer. On the contrary, cement prices in Lebanon are considered among the cheapest in the Arab countries. The cable industry has also prospered to reach an internationally recognizable standard. The shoes industry, on the other hand, was about to die out, had it not been protected. The wine industry too, that has become international and has succeeded to penetrate world markets- would it have been successful if it had not been provided with the proper protection???

What is strange in this context is the lifting of the protection on the ceramics industry, after the successful experience that lasted one year, despite the support similar industries receive in the Arab world.

The Ministry of Economy and Trade and the Lebanese government have failed to devise a clear strategy to protect Lebanon and its national production. In fact, the government finds it easy to go along with the rules of trade liberalization, and to make up justifications for not abiding by the National Production Protection Law. The government also resorts to unreasonable excuses to stop the imposition of preventive measures. Obstacles appear only when there is an attempt to apply Article 2 of the agreements, devised in particular to prevent the collapse of industry.

Today we claim our legitimate right to fight subsidized dumping that was endorsed by Parliament and acknowledged by all the international agreements, especially those of the World Trade Organization.

Asking the industrial sector to emigrate from Lebanon is not an economic theory, but rather a declaration of bankruptcy. What is worse is that this call is adopted by an authority figure who controls and watches over the productive sectors.