JFK vs Dr Patrick Muana : On State Protection Service.

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-13

[00:00:00]We don't need to discuss from the issues we get to do with the drug scandal with the country they go on with now and also we can look at the other issues we can discuss what all right and remember say you watch the show continue your message ask your question regarding the state protection service as we don't get the inim director the studio now concerns they don't come yes from um JFK and also other concerns from the public we go for can get answer we get to all of them question and we don't come up so far um good morning Dr. Good morning and welcome to the breakfast show.

[00:00:41]>> A very very good morning.

[00:00:43]>> All right. Let me just start first from onion perspective as um the side of a government the idea behind getting this particular act be reviewed and we don't get uh part of an they ask for let we get a state protection service all this idea come out.

[00:01:04]>> Thank you very much for hosting me.

[00:01:05]Sorry about coming in my time late and some other engagements.

[00:01:09]Um, a couple of things we are going to need for point. The act itself is not a new act. It's not something that's been conjured up, has been smolding by President Bill for press opponents or any of the other fear-mongering um, and you know other expressions we make. Um, this act itself was put together in 2002 and I'm very sure that uh, my brother and friend in the room is aware of the existence of this act since 2002. He's even used it as ACC director um as head of ACC. Um he must have been a member of the war cabinet at some point quote unquote war cabinet being at national security council. They make a provision uh for the presence of not only um you know specific people waiting at um you know waiting at the cabinet but also they can bring other people them in. Um so it's not a new act just like Cassie now in 2022 the entire process started because his excellency recognized that there's a certain lacuna in the law as at this point VIP protection when not just a function had been undertaken by a detachment of police and then a detachment from the military but they not been any law we regulate them they not get any structure, we can get any command element, not get any doctrine.

[00:02:35]The selection process was really at you know the very behest of any individual president feel like I want for you know for this person can't protect me or this person not protect me. So be very open.

[00:02:49]You can invoke him during times of emergency because you want military for supporting police for carry out certain functions where you deem fit. That is open to abuse. And we see say after President Kroma come in 2007, he continue for use the same. As a matter of fact, he expanded it because what he do is he bring in former servicemen, ex-servicemen um as well as former combatants and some party militants. You bring them in weapons, you get them crash training and then put them Vietnam and get a bigger disachment from the military. Now there's a problem there because when you do that you politicize parts of the army and parts of the police. You also um you know undermine moral and the very basis of constitutional democracy. So his excellency in his wisdom you know thoughts and feet say all the security all the heads of security institutions we all get together let's have a conversation you you guys go and have a conversation about this do about it legislate something that has a doctrine that has a structure that has a command element and it's also accountable because at this point in time anybody you know when they say coffee streets an weapon you can just go do anything crazy right So the body begin meeting in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and then come up with something. So cabinet make a paper then they pass the paper. Then after that um you know they continue for me in various workshops and then in 2005 the AG and the legal team then put together um this bill after I don't put together this bill it go through cabinets back then take a look at some before they before before they gazette then gam in January of this year >> so January February March April May 5 months they don't out there in the gates they reg Um um back in February they also put copies of them at the pigeon holes of all the MPs and and and I like you know like me brother I'll be honorable they don't have me say yes APC members they see I'm not in pigeon hole they read them and then they come meet them and express opinions about her now so my point here is that this is not something there's no operation creep here uh we left you know left a fear mongering is it good for Leon. Yes, it is good for Sierra Leon. Um, we need for regulates people protect VIPs. We need for we need for ensure we know who that be and if they do something wrong, we need for bring you know make them accountable. So that's why the SPS has um you know accountability at both the horizontal levels as well as at the vertical level. At the horizontal level you get a command structure. You get a code of conduct which is really uh um which is a combination of 42 rules 47 rules of the police plus the arsaf and you know then your groups all together and then modernize them. That's the code of conduct. So if you fall foul of that or if you fall foul of that you know critical clause um you know about political neutrality there's a problem we we can talk shout vertically you get a state protection service committee where comprise the IG the CDS NS court head of CISA all heads of um all heads of security institutions then they look at them people and they do and how they behave and how they act above that you get national security council also when they take a look at them above of that also any act any act where any member of state protection service do parliament get a right for column and so on and then ask for mr legal person believe if this law become a police state and for the question don't they ask now why now within the bill led administration don't do we for >> so here's what I've been talking about um I mean in terms of suspicion and fear mongering right just like point out alian the this process started the process itself started in 2022 so it's not like he he's just started it you know just yesterday and it's not like it's been rushed through parliament either just like just just like how um you know you know just like I actually mentioned it's been caseed. They go through privilege. You go through first reading, second reading, third reading. They get the views of the council of chiefs. They get the views of Elraj. They get views of a number of other individuals. They put all together and not one committee s on this not just a legislative committee may write this. Um you get the defense committee, you get the internal affairs committee, they all join as well as Ali.

[00:07:38]They all get together and this thing went through several iterations, several debates in parliament. And we know I'm sure it was covered by Liberty TV. You can see how animated people were even from the government site you know in discussing elements of this bill. So if the bill get this kind awareness and inclusion we talk about why legal practitioner and JFK is serious concern continuously I'm sure you don't see the various pieces where you don't write about how fearful this particular law especially some of the powers where people like you in director get I don't I don't get I don't get any powers at all we we extraordinary the powers that we get for with administering a group of uh police officers and soldiers where they on secondment >> from the from the military as well as from the police. Bring them in, establish a doctrine and a command structure, supervise them, make sure say they act right, they do right, and then do their duties right. VIP protection practitioners, we're always in the shadows. Most of we most of know me as somebody, you know, they perform that particular role. Um you can name up to five of them. We're there right and we roll not so for be offensive for go begin you know like the agent feation and risk investigation for for effect at any time.

[00:09:09]Yes. People mix up people mix up you know the powers the powers of CISA.

[00:09:15]>> Mhm.

[00:09:15]>> Yes. And it's interesting back in I think that 2012 JFK brother JFK brother he used the same that same warrants on his things you know for for let for investigate certain cases you know with the ACC even go ahead and sign an MOU um at the time I think it was Christopher John right yeah been sign for let that party for let you know for let try for investigation people that's not within that's not you know we go we investigate people not get ps of arrest we not get ps of detention we not get ps of investigation the do of intelligence police do you know police do police law enforcements and all of that the army they continue for do everything we get for do um um you know territorial sovereignty we have nothing like that. So if I told anybody bring I just fearing I mean poss come into action. So for instance if CISA is and FISU when established um um um you know intelligence agencies determine say there's this kind of threat then the SPS of itself they present onto the SPS committee the SPS committee comprise the national the national security coordinator the IG CDS and all them people in it they present and say here's what we here's what we've received this not a you know this not actionable intelligence Yes. And then we can put operational plans for counter that or for prevent you know any particular risk to the VIP way we protect. So that's what we do.

[00:11:10]>> So now eyes are threats to the VIP owner for protect. Well, there are several threats um threats of we know threats of several threats in the several threats today like for if I saw somebody they you know they plan as a loan actor like for carry out um uh I mean an act of terrorism um like for shoot one of them people and they for instance if you get access to for stab or you know reputational damage or for hacking computer and then cause certain kinds of um threats or for use drone you know for attacking why is it in a public space There are several kinds of threats to the person we we protect and waiting you know and waiting at the person you own reputation. So all we do is risk mitigation risk prevention that's all we do. The police and the military.

[00:11:58]According to you for the under your supervision and when you look at the police and the military one of the major role for protect lives and property and then supposed for be independent with this new role as the Indian director and the one on second under your supervision you know think say take away the independence of this two state institution. Yeah. So um that's a really great question. So quickly for me I just highlight you know certain elements.

[00:12:31]>> Number one the people where they come then they come on secondment >> to the SPS where they come on secondment then they go then they undergo a very very very rigorous process of recruitment. In that process of recruitment if you want I can just highlight them really fast you know so you'll get a sense of it they begin with a general announcement >> in the military and the police after that they do pre-screening pre-screening they lead to medicals medical they lead to ethical um we know institutional test once they don't do the integrity testing then they do psy dots then do background and then vetting where they don't do background in vetting that background in vetting they check whether you use drugs you you know alcoholic we don't commit crime or we don't ever get any kind of bad record at the military or the police after that then I do the PT right the PC then I test your physical fitness if you fit enough then you know we get to training when we get to training you know training by continuous assessment after our module if you fail the first mod we drop you out >> should you train all over again >> oh absolutely >> so then that difference from what they don't get that the military and the police >> because because the type of training where SPS operatives need completely different from the basic training where they get they get our military. So example we do you know they do advance and reconnaissance as well as operational planning. Not everybody they do that.

[00:13:56]>> Mr. Not a duplication.

[00:14:00]No, not so not not duplication because these are these are higher you know this high echelon of skills >> right where I try for highlight um you know cyber security as well as AI mediated uh uh um risks not to every member of the police or the military they do that >> so the experts at the cyber security they do currently at the cyber security unit because there's a unit where they help in criminal investigations they do.

[00:14:30]>> So we can draw on people just like mentioned we draw people from the police, we draw people from the military. If you get specialized skills for instance in you know AI immediate threats or you don't do counterterrorism before we will draw you in and then say come join we can help for you know get this help for provide this very specialized service.

[00:14:52]>> So that you get for doing the recruitment yourself. No like so so you get the state protection service committee just like point out we comprise the IG the CDS the NS court elisted very clearly the law yeah now then they determine that so with all of that plan the big question is why introducing this now if all the idea then why not the current people they work with security for protect everybody instead of putting people at categories. Why?

[00:15:27]>> So VIP protection has existed since you know Jesus was a baby. In fact, King Herod as well as the Roman emperors, they all been VIP protection.

[00:15:38]It has continued. It has happened right throughout salon history. So VIP protection is a function.

[00:15:46]>> No. So let let me finish. So VIP protection is just a function. the state protection service is just a name plate that's going to be put on that function.

[00:15:56]>> Yeah. Not to any not to anything new not to a new force because just like you know I be highlight whether you know SPS law or you know they presidents are going to use MAC P then we invoke MP and bring people and come in and get and say hey we're not trying for protect but what we're trying to create now with SPS is we want professional service where they go across administrations where they continue for serve this nation with a highly specialized skills pretty much what the you know pretty much what Liberia has done with the EPS from when they introduced the EPS right in 1921 it still exists they don't go through cycles of war and all sorts of things they just like Nigeria from what I from when I bang introduced them in 1986 the SSS still they go on >> is there any serious threat right now we make feel this come into effect now >> so so we don't we don't you don't have to have a threat to make you make a or when they facilitate a professional neutral specialized body we continue for carry on then ask you forget you don't need forget an active threat you know before you do that uh laws are made so that um in the event of then you need them right but but not like say uh you know they make the law now because JFK >> before bringing JFK again because you don't throw light on some of the concerns that But the SPS gets any powers for gather intelligence on an individual way.

[00:17:36]>> Absolutely zero. We job not for carry out intelligence. We job not for arrest.

[00:17:43]We job not for detain. We job not for like ask people working agent people. That's not what we do. So I not get power for gather intelligence on an individual for example if you come for protect me now you not get that powerful gather intelligence around me >> I cannot get any reason for >> so how you going to mitigate threats around me if you not get intelligence >> operationally you get the IS and FSU as well as then go tell me say hey exporting they pose a threat to Kadel it don't you know it don't scoop them out so intelligence gathering.

[00:18:22]>> No, no, no. But that is that is what CISA would do and they're still doing that. So they gather the intelligence and feed them to feed based on we can make we can make an operational decision say hey let we increase the number of personnel with around kadija let we let we bring in one or two them go instead of kad in let we get you know let we get a vehicle you know all ka so that person come and then we attack the issue privacy coming where people get on the years.

[00:18:59]>> So, so, so the issue of privacy is it's it's not about your private life. Yeah.

[00:19:03]VIP protection is not about your private life. Get a private life. So, uh SPS for protect your life for protect your life for protect your property.

[00:19:21]So if that calls for for just the day that they do so like for instance you know like US security service they know they go check into you know last talk to no they don't look into that kind of thing yes then they deal with proximate threats things where they affect you make the law mention yeah proximate security you know say you know personal security don't mention that at all >> right bring in JFK you don't listen to PK1 I don't talk you Don't try for address some of the issues where you don't flag this morning some of the concerns them where you don't talk about for not now then start all of this conversation and for feel it's timely forget then kind >> yeah thank you DJ and welcome me brother to the studio and uh this is what we want in this country dialogue and conversation I thank very much for Sudon we are friends but on opposite shades.

[00:20:22]Yes. And welcome. One thing I see they do it focus on the SPS the special protection service which is the inim designated director quite right but the the act go beyond that it intelligence as well and I don't see the talk about that or maybe not get enough information for cover that me as a lawyer and a human right activist I look holistically the whole document But I come to the focus on and ask the correct question if then they process intelligence deny or maybe not too familiar with very act. If you look at section 32C, you see analyze and act on threats.

[00:21:11]Analyze and act on threats. What are you analyzing? Intelligence reports then act on threat. How are you going to act on the threats?

[00:21:20]So, and when will you talk about the definition of threat? If you go to the definitional section of the act you know so we we talk some of us we get what we call the four corner principle we look at a particular thing you look at the whole act you know just look at the SPS now because we go beyond the SPS it cover all other things SPS look smile activities within or relating to directed towards or in support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against personal property for the purpose of achieving a political objective political objective threat act on threat. So Mr. PK sitt there is he going to act on a threat of a political objective. The order talk about also is as he sits there he has immunity under the law under section 33 subsection 5 with the deal about state protection service. He sits here as director is immune. An action or other proceeding shall not lie or be instituted against a member of the state protection service committee or a committee set up by the state protection service coordinator or in respect of art or anything done omitted to be done in good faith by the act good faith who interprets good faith him there is going to tell us what good faith is it's wrong you cannot tell us what good faith is you are the perpetrator yes you have liability for an action and it cannot be you who will be telling us the public what is good faith. It is an exercise of discretion belonging to you with high potential for abuse in law school the good faith has always been thorny. So what you will always a time for do now for reduce the exercise of discretion of power on the individual.

[00:23:25]So if him seated there he mention for JFK if he begs because I talk something against him then 3:00 morning can knock for wake me up on a security threat issue. Yes. He say it was done in good faith he cannot go to court.

[00:23:51]So maybe he either see you in understand or see they refuse to acknowledge. Good faith has to be determined by him and it is wrong drafting. It is going to create problems of the court. Then not only on that section you go back to section 43 subsection two notwithstanding any enactment to the contrary that is anything concerning this with the opposite arm the director general under director they shall not include criminal liability for taking part in any operations sting operations or anything they go to section 54 the umbrella one an employee shall not be required to produce before parliament a document if the speaker don't satisfy the document evidence who belong to classified information.

[00:24:45]Now parliament has this overriding power to request for documents and an act cannot oust that power from parliament just because the speaker certify.

[00:24:58]How the speaker they certify over and above within parliament one see it is taken away from parliament and putting it to a speaker as an individual seated there. So they act a controversial himself then another living broad address the war cabinet is not about fear mongering became a real issue for us. We believe in the tenets of democracy and the freedom of the individual and the rights of the individual. It's not a threat and it's not fearongering. If you were on opposite sides, you'll feel the same as I'm feeling. You feel secure now because you're a part of the government. But what tomorrow I become president, the same love will apply to you. And I don't want you to feel as I'm feeling now.

[00:25:46]You're my brother. So let us elevate it above the person now. And at the same way you look at the act it tell you say the war cabinet like I mentioned on you but we not ever call a war cabinet sitting a cabinet waiting is due we knew it make the police and military members of the cabinet that is not correct under the law. Now what is section 169 of the constitution?

[00:26:24]Section 169 of the constitution say no not for be part of the cabinet.

[00:26:33]Yes 165 subsection 3. No member of the armed forces shall hold office as president, vice president, minister or deputy visa or be qualified as a member of parliament. Yes, you cannot be a minister.

[00:26:49]You can only serve in the cabinet if you're a minister.

[00:26:54]It also go for the police. So in this new act, the war cabinet bringing police officers such as the inspector general and in bringing military officers.

[00:27:04]Now what am I saying that is inconsistent here in cabinet PK? You invite expertise to brief cabinet.

[00:27:13]They're not members of cabinet. Before you came, I mentioned that Winston Churchill when he was hosting the war cabinet in the basement of Westminster Abby, he invited the generals to brief cabinet, but they were never members of cabinet. Now this new act, it make them members of a war cabinet and that is not correct. It contradict the basic tenants of section 159 section 1692 as I suggest as I make clear. So when it contradict the constitution the thing we call on the president to do Mr. PK advised the president to return this act to parliament and correct those controversial provisions and those provisions that contradict the constitution. That is what democracies you lose nothing. I'm not saying that the act is bad as a whole. There are things we can do about it. Yes, in terms of um side and go wrong with the law, the constitution we can amend that and there are other areas where we feel insecure as a people then it can be taken care of in the areas of immunity.

[00:28:20]It breach the constitution. Nobody is above the law. Everybody is subject to the law. That also can be looked at and made them have the al get judicial oversight of all your powers directly exercised by you.

[00:28:35]not bringing PK.

[00:28:37]>> I don't know this man for 42 years. I don't see I don't say man as a politician this time. Seriously, I just like honestly um he was my classmate >> childhood friend. I mean we we're we're really close right outside and beyond this.

[00:28:55]>> Um begin from the back >> and then come forward.

[00:28:59]Min reader I let you just Google the definition of war cabinet and read for the readers let them understand cabinet before I respond to this man please just watch >> no >> no not to you not to you let me get a third read the meaning of war cabinet >> a war cabinet is a small specialized committee formed by a government during wartime to centralize, expedite and streamline high level decision making.

[00:29:40]>> Thank you.

[00:29:42]>> Wait more. It is a subset of the full executive cabinet usually consisting of the head of government, key ministers and military advisors to ensure rapid response to military development and strategic planning. it don't so I know you dismantive but that particular issue when the man talk you know you know for military advis IG and the you know the other man as part of that so-called committee during wartime where nobody ever use don't the act since 2002 this man don't use that act this man don't act as ag don't use them as member don't use as ag don't see them don't see national security council meetings you Oh, >> but it well the question during war.

[00:30:32]>> No, no, no. So the point that I'm trying to make is >> this man has been aware of that >> they use this lawyers from that day to now >> complain to me I don't know for campaign for complain >> but let me finish let me finish LET ME FINISH NO WAIT WAIT WAIT >> wait don't read this don't you don't read me and you hold on to we own positions kadia don't read for the for the listenership They understand it is not what you're trying to claim it is.

[00:31:06]So let we let we proceed to the next ones because um you know actually get time. All right. The 2002 act and the 2023 act essentially and maintain the only things that we add there are four levels of things we didn't add.

[00:31:26]Number one, they increase the gender minimum at the prox and the chex which I think is good for you know woman be more more security matters in discussing security matters and making policies about matters right across board which I think is a progressive thing which I think is a good thing and I think you agree with that. Yes.

[00:31:48]>> The second element where they introduce is that parliament gets oversight and the SPS. So for instance if the SPS do something where parliament not feel right they can they can bring them in and say can I explain to you which is everything on word SPS mandated for for you know for explain to parliament.

[00:32:10]Additionally you skip this part of the complaints. Yes. So tribunal complaints you get element part 9. You talk about the tribunal complaints in the process.

[00:32:20]So the judiciary gets a hold over the SPS. Right. So, so it is it is it is actually more accountable as a security service almost any other security service within at this point in time both at the horizontal level and at the vertical level. Yes. Then the other element is that the SPS not only protect the VIPs when they unleash but there's also the entire national leadership including the minority leader including the deputy minority leader including also as part of the designated VIPs. The whole concept is that you know security will be provided for opposition politicians where they don't make candidates. So for instance if JFK finally get lock for you know win the APC flagship protect this man this man brother he knows that I'll give him the protection that he deserves and way you know we're required of him and you know say men don't for the longest time he knows me very well and I know him very well you know say I protecting life with me on life he knows that very well right I just politics talking and I and I respect that and I understand that I'm not from the lens of a politician. I just I just want for make this clear you know.

[00:33:38]So the final element also where I want for highlight uh is where he mentioned this idea about uh I think the question where you may ask it completely misjudcing and analyzing >> the question where he asked was >> the SPS can gather intelligence.

[00:33:57]>> Yeah.

[00:33:58]>> Gathering intelligence is completely different from processing and analyzing it. Yeah. Gathering intelligence means you go out use the tools and for fing SPS not do that the SPS only way you don't get old team you come SPS watch say no this not make sense this okay this I think say you know require for you follow act what the SPS does is it processes and analyzes just read yeah um so that's clearly the case um the question of immunity.

[00:34:34]So when the IG for instance feel like say um somebody or I mean a group of persons they act or they try to undermine the peace and security of this country they can send uh they can send C they go investigate that's not what what state protection service work that they can do that that in action they in good faith because he genuinely believes say that that not the Right. And he's answerable to the police council. He's answerable to parliament.

[00:35:08]He's answerable to all other levels.

[00:35:10]That's not what the SPS does. The SPS for do granular secret police for Jeff, you know, I mean shoot for leg.

[00:35:25]That's what we're trying to completely avoid. We want for move away from that era. We want to move away from the era where you not get professional people in um well trained people in where they act as VIP protection people. That's what we want in this country. That's what this that's that's what our democracy deserves and that make we don't move we don't take that move day for move uh you know for move up and out >> and you talk about democracy just last week we've been get the lawyer society at the studio and we from JFK this morning then said they make the same call to the president not for sign this particular act for go back parliament one for more views be included so that diverse views go reflect the outcome of this particular act before finally the president go sign him as the instream director. You think say this an opportunity for let more views be added.

[00:36:18]You want let the president sign this or you the support say because you get clear mind a clear law protect the states let the president not sign a le back. So uh I come from a space where uh critical thinking is really part is really a big part of um um you know my career you know in the profession. Um just like I say several people then get opportunities at several stages for express views about this >> within and without um Ilra for instance put a position you know put a position paper together and send them to a committee and the committee consider favorably the council of chiefs put a position paper together then send them it was considered favorably um honorable Abdul Kabo don't highlight the facts say, "Hey, listen up. These things, this bill was put into every pigeon hole of every APC politician, every APC honorable lead in our parliament in a reader and then and you know and then they express personal views to him. what he wants now which I think makes sense is a consolidated position from all people which is a good thing right but in terms of the fact say there was no opportunity for let people express their views for JFK expressing views at a committee stage that's clearly not the case this thing uh this thing was this thing was gazetted for 5 months it was considered over the pre-lay session first reading second reading third reading think up because um you know according to the speaker and from according to the speaker APC uh APC honorable express views and they express them views them day um you know he was approached by the moral guarantee Mary he was approached by the moral guarantors for say hold of the passing of this law and we said they talk to if he's parliamentarians let him go immediately immediately let him come immediately I made to parliament.

[00:38:26]The speaker in his wisdom held us back.

[00:38:30]One sitting, second sitting, third sitting, the man is still logo. So the business of government obviously cannot wait. Um and Jeff K know that right? I mean as ag several laws the way I mean you've been pushed and we been pilots clearly you know if at all the opposition don't decide not participate in the process of making this law business of government has to continue but I respect those views this is it but you know this is the democracy more views the better yes >> so advisable for let president and back parliament and get more views and opinion about >> I wouldn't say so um my thinking is no commit It's amazing the president do the president do. What I what what I what I what I personally believe is that we've had an exhaustive debate on this law at all levels of society. It's been exhaustive. People have had the opportunity for let express their views.

[00:39:29]JFK had opportunities over the last 5 months for make write as many articles as possible. Men to get phone conversation with hang out. Yeah. me to don't discuss this. So, so interpreting the law and fearongering is one thing.

[00:39:46]Yes.

[00:39:47]um you know dog whistling and and and and making all sorts of other inuations about the intent of the law. That's another thing >> for one of the fear that he's a politician and if this has opposition politician if they get any threat and the law go I mean people are entitled to feeling um insecure personally. Yeah. I jump on the street and say, "Oh, um, you know, this particular BM me this whole team and you know, probably they have to assassinate me becoming a director of state protection service." People feel those things, but there's a very there's a very big line between paranoia and fear monging on one hand and really waiting at the real intent of the >> so that they happen to people like Jeff K.

[00:40:38]>> I I mean, I wouldn't say that he, you know, he's been a really good brother.

[00:40:41]He's always been very secure. I don't know why all of a sudden they feel this guy. Um but he knows that I mean all I'm for. We we we hang out in places where at all but but but he knows more than anybody else for say me leadership of this particular person but me leadership of the SPS not get any tam or for any other member of the opposition as a matter of fact I know and JFK knows I was our college mate right I'm close close man I my colleague I'm a man bing bing bing b Of course this man say that you know I mean classmates as you know class men play men who jump and do all sorts of crazy things. I mean we have very interesting stories to tell about each other but you know >> I mean he's aspiring to be president so I wouldn't say those things but the point that I'm trying to say is feel safe feel secure the law is the law a clear interpretation nobody intends to we know nobody intends to misuse it and me personally they give me personal level I give that assurance for say this law won't be misused at all at all at all.

[00:41:57]Well, thank you very much and I appreciate your comments of course but I want you know say this is not about you and I it could be any other director it could be any other person apart from JP for me it's institutional issue so where they raise comments it's not about fear I'm hungry and I keep on emphasizing as a citizen I have a duty to safeguard the interest of our people they get a badge of honor already even before the institution has been created you know but that's an aside I can understand they come But the question may asked very good is do you believe that they should go back and you were kind of prearing the one side on the other side. Yes. You see you believe from your background and I want to challenge that which I know PK that I honestly believe that you want this to go back to parliament advises excellency the president appropriately.

[00:42:49]You and I talk the PK I know the man I know say go back get the view and let it be resolved from all the controversial issues I wish some of we don't raise it's not after politics speak it's not because I want to be president it's because I care for the people cuz without presidency I will say the same thing but what you and I most agree on is what is for the benefit of each and every person and I take them you know if I become president I'll not go after you or go after people for me.

[00:43:22]I am focused on delivery. And so personally between you and I, it's not you or me or Adi or your eco. It's about the day we get the wrong person in the seat. And that is the fear. And like I said, the immunity is not about um IG with your example. No, they mean it's about you, the exercise of your discretion that is given immunity under the act. You did not address that and I think it's a failure on the part of the act and it's just not you. the NSG the NSSG the chairman of that person and all of those exercising those discretion under section 54 the immunity I talk about no it is not right for sting operations if he go botched they have an immunity under the law it is not correct for go they suspect say somebody let they go get let go arrest them then in the course of arrest somebody die it's murder and they cannot be immune for that so these are the issues with is and uh you don't have to be very defensive about everything. The issue is the part of the law can be correct. The part of the law cannot be correct. And I've raised areas that are controversial, areas that I believe from my experience, 36 years as a lawyer.

[00:44:34]You study English and I don't say security business. I don't like that.

[00:44:39]That's another but coming to about 36 years as a lawyer. I know what I'm saying. I've been at the highest level of practitioner. highest level, international or local. So when I they read a legislation, I know what I'm talking about. When I talk about the four corner principles, I know what I'm talking about. When I talk about the shining bell of the sun, I know what I talk about. So please let us respect each other when it comes to interpretation and doing each other's job. Your job, you talk about security, fine, your qualifications, another matter for us to discuss. But which I say as a lawyer, when I look at issues that are controversial to the constitution, I take it personal on behalf of my people. That's what I'm doing. And so I'm glad to be here. I have to go to the Supreme Court on the matter. But um you and I as always will continue aspiring and buying and I always value the relationship and nothing personal say and very protective of his job. But um every way they don't give you before even the job set up so other for talk but because you are going talk >> so quick prime minister take away from all of this conversation we and JFK don't get >> so from all of this conversation there's no immunity from prosecution uh SPS members know they above the law and they are accountable not only to the SPS codes um you know structure of command but also vertically to the committee and national security council to the parliament and to the judiciary anybody say anything to the contrary uh it's the same thing fear mongering yes so anybody entitled for say that as a politician but but it is clearly not the case um so that is one um secondly you know I'm very happy that he writes a long long cabinet but we don't read that definition it don't move you know it don't come which is good which is a good thing I mean I like the brother because he always acknowledges he always acknowledges is when he's wrong, you know, I mean on certain matters. Uh when you talk about sting operations and warrants, this guy use sting operations.

[00:46:43]If he signed MOU, Google if he signed MOU uh uh you know when he was head of the ACC for letting conduct sterations and you know use warrants by CISU at the time, right, under Commissioner John for makeable for investigates corruption.

[00:47:00]Yes, he he's been using this law forever and yet all of a sudden uh you know he's this new guy I mean on the road to Damascus you all of a sudden you don't discover say oh although we don't use them although we don't sit down at national security council what is law I because I ar president no not so law for me let us be fair let us be clearminded about what we want for achieve as a as a country and as a constitutional democracy nobody is immune under this act will continue for me accountable.

[00:47:30]The experts will continue to act in the best interest of Syria.

[00:47:33]>> All right. Thank you gentlemen. We want to join you this morning for can get conversation in response to um lawyer Joseph in concerning question and also Ali in fear them where he get about this particular um law. We will continue for get this conversation and wait until for know if whether his excellency the president go sign him or he go send him back parliament as people like JFK they call on his excellency for send back parliament then go look inside some of the gray areas them where bill get now they end this conversation many thanks join me this morning continue for watch liberty TV throughout the day get yourself a lovely week ahead all right so till we meet again get a lovely day and goodbye.

[00:48:20]>> Thank you.

[00:48:31]Spirit spirit.

[00:49:08]You are watching Liberty Breakfast Show on Liberty Online TV.