Ministry of Energy: This Article Is Unfair to the Truth!

Issued by the media office of the Ministry of Energy and Water:

The journalist Azza Al-Haj Hassan wrote an article titled "16 Years of Darkness.. Energy Ministers Compete Over 'No Electricity' on the \"Madinat\" Platform on 24/8/2026. At the very least, it is unfair to the truth and revives the populist slogan \"All for all\", even if it occasionally attempts to soften its tone. However, placing someone surrounded by allegations of theft, corruption, and waste on the same level as the current Minister of Energy and Water, Jou al-Sadi—whose integrity and transparency are beyond reproach—is not just unfair, but worse.

Therefore, to dispel any confusion or misunderstanding, we wish to clarify the following:

Before delving into the article's details, consider this: comparing the current Ministry of Energy’s performance to that of the one who held the post for 16 years under conditions of security stability, a financially solvent state, and foreign investors flooding into Lebanon—such as the Kuwaiti Fund and German Siemens, which were both rejected—placing them on equal footing is, at best, illogical.

The current Ministry’s response does not match the scale of the coordinated attacks it faces. In fact, many criticize Minister Jou al-Sadi for not responding to every attack directed at him. Is issuing statements when necessary to avoid misleading Lebanese citizens considered "a provocation," as the article claims? Is naming things by their true names a crime? Is describing lies as lies a sin? Isn’t mixing unrelated matters and making unwarranted conclusions sheer ignorance?

The author claims that al-Sadi arrived as a passive observer in the matter of securing power supply, overlooking the efforts made according to a seven-pronged strategy he has implemented to address the electricity sector’s reality: importing electricity and gas, establishing electrical interconnections, and activating solar energy farms after the establishment of the regulatory authority for the electricity sector, whose mandate includes this task.

It seems the so-called "virtual applause" mentioned by the author has been overshadowed. By what logic should the forensic audit mentioned in the article be read through a political bias rather than a genuine fight against corruption—especially since it came after 10 years, or more accurately, 15 years after the arrival of the power ships? Did the Free Patriotic Movement (FPML) exist in the ministry before 2025 and delay action? Then the author is surprised, stating that the "uprising against power ships" occurred while Lebanese citizens still lacked electricity. Does the absence of electricity justify halting audits?! What is the connection between them?! Such arguments can only be understood superficially.

Recall that the Turkish company Cardine was contracted in 2012, and the temporary solution was extended until 2021. Do you remember that during this period, the FPML was in government for only about two years? The core issue was not the use of temporary power ships, but the transformation of temporary measures into permanent ones, and the failure to build modern power plants alongside the ships as originally planned. During that time, Deputy Prime Minister Ghassan Hasbani and Minister Kamil Abu Suleiman, along with other FPML ministers, were at the forefront demanding accelerated construction of power plants and enforcement of the Public Accounting Law. The minutes of cabinet meetings and official press statements serve as clear evidence.

The author claims solutions are absent from the discussion, asking about liberalizing production, attracting foreign investment, and forming partnerships with the private sector. Yet these are precisely the elements that are missing. When invited to multiple discussion sessions, she responded that the platform would be represented by one of her journalists in the economics section—a respected figure who has witnessed the ministry’s actions firsthand. Have you reviewed the government-approved policy paper on the electricity sector, which emphasizes liberalizing production? Have you taken note of the investor climate reported by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a part of the World Bank, which demands financial and security guarantees?

Whenever the author speaks of audacity, isn’t placing the FPML in the energy sector on the same level as the Future Movement (Tayyar) as mentioned above itself audacious?

Isn’t denying the existence of an announced vision and ambitions—and claiming that Lebanon today handles the electricity file like a modest neighborhood shop, unable to borrow yet lacking funds to buy essentials, with no plans or ambitions to resolve its crisis—an act of audacity?

Is it a crime for the Minister of Energy to safeguard Lebanese public funds and base electricity distribution on actual revenue collection, avoiding new state treasury loans and steering clear of the "trap" of debt that previously engulfed Future Movement ministers? Yet the author claims he relies solely on "distribution based on revenue collection" and denies the multiple pathways he is pursuing—this is, in itself, audacious.

In conclusion, the author tells us that "when we achieved a political change in the Ministry of Energy, we believed the change would reflect a shift in the mindset governing one of the country’s most vital service ministries. Instead, day by day, we find ourselves sinking deeper into a swamp of no planning and a useless political marketplace." But what we actually see is an "information marketplace" that fails to distinguish between the mentality of borrowing and debt, backdoor deals without tenders, and promises of 24/7 electricity, versus the mindset of avoiding debt, adhering to law, upholding public procurement rules, and refraining from empty promises.