The Controversy of Rights and Benefits of Former Vice President Gibran

Some constitutional law experts reject this interpretation. They argue that resigning after two court rulings questioning educational qualifications cannot automatically be termed honorable.

This viewpoint rests on the classic principle that rights should not arise from actions that are legally flawed.

On the other hand, the de facto official doctrine posits that Gibran's actions during his tenure remain valid for the sake of legal certainty for the public.

Both positions could actually be reconciled. The validity of actions taken in office is protected as it concerns the public interest, but this does not automatically mean that personal rights stemming from that office should also be protected.

A Test of Justice

Two theoretical lenses help weigh this issue. Aristotle, through the notion of distributive justice, teaches that rewards should be distributed according to merit and worthiness. Treating different matters as the same constitutes injustice.

A lifetime pension identical for a five-year vice president with valid qualifications and for a two-year vice president whose candidacy was annulled clearly disregards the principle of proportionality.

John Rawls in A Theory of Justice (1971) offers a sharper test through the idea of the veil of ignorance.

Imagine citizens formulating rules without knowing whether they would become officials or ordinary citizens.

They would almost certainly reject rules that allow the highest officials to enjoy full rights after their qualifications are annulled, while an ordinary job applicant is immediately disqualified when their diploma is declared invalid.

Justice as propriety demands rules that can be accepted by all parties, rather than rules that benefit those at the top.

Comparing with civil servants clarifies this inequality. A new civil servant is only entitled to a pension after fulfilling a certain service period and can be dismissed honorably if found using invalid documents.

Strict standards for employees at the lower levels, but lenient for officials at the top is a form of injustice that is readily felt by the public.

In Rawlsian terms, inequality can only be justified if it benefits the least advantaged, not the most powerful.

However, not all facilities deserve to be challenged with equal weight. Security by the Presidential Security Forces is protective.

Former vice presidents remain public figures who are vulnerable to threats, and their safety pertains to the country's prestige.