The legal representative of the head of the Free Patriotic Movement, MP Gebran Bassil, lawyer Majid Boyz, indicated in a statement in response to Hadi Al-Amin “about what he called the chartering of ships,” to “a repeated attempt to present incorrect facts to public opinion as if they were established facts.” He said: The aforementioned ships were not originally rented, and were not the subject of a lease in the sense that he is trying to portray. Rather, they are factories for the production of floating energy in the water, and the electrical energy produced from them is purchased according to a mechanism similar, in principle, to purchasing energy from any land-based electrical production factory. Boyes pointed out that the issue is not related to “renting ships” or purchasing them, but rather to the cost of energy production, including fuel, operation, maintenance, and other costs associated with electricity production, which are costs borne by any energy producing entity, whether the plant is floating or land. Boyes confirmed that the cost of energy purchased from ships was lower than the cost of energy imported from Syria, and was also lower than the cost of energy produced in a number of old factories in Lebanon. Most importantly, electric energy is paid for after it is produced and distributed, without paying any rent to the ships He pointed out that "what is more dangerous than that is that the aforementioned journalist is fully aware of these facts, especially in light of the investigations conducted by the Financial Public Prosecution in the ship file, which concluded, with regard to the head of the Free Patriotic Movement, the absence of any responsibility or involvement for him in any deal related to the file, and the file was preserved against him, while those who were considered responsible were referred to the competent investigating judge." Bassil’s agent said: “It is not possible to separate what the aforementioned journalist is promoting today from the precedents of his program in dealing with recordings whose content was distorted and baseless accusations were fabricated according to what is established in the judicial file, which led to the prosecution being brought against him by the Public Prosecution of Appeal, and he is currently being tried before the competent court. The matter becomes clearer with his insistence on re-broadcasting the same accusations, despite the issuance of a letter of response from us refuting them and clarifying their truth, which is something that contradicts the simplest rules. The journalistic work that is supposed to be done. He stressed, "We will continue to confront these allegations with facts, documents, rulings, and judicial decisions, not with slogans or media debates. In this context, today we filed a new complaint before the Public Prosecution of Appeal in Beirut against the aforementioned journalist, which was registered under the number 16312/sh and referred to the competent authorities, to take the necessary legal measures. We will not allow the circulated lies to be transformed into “facts” once they are repeated, or to transform media headlines into an alternative to documents and rulings. The judiciary. In the end, the decisive factor is not the title, nor the media show, nor the abundance of repetition, but rather the judiciary, the documents, and the established facts.”