“In the Name of Allah the Most Beneficent the Most Merciful,
All praises are due to Allah and peace and blessings be upon the messenger and his family and companions and those who follow him, as for what comes forth.
As for what concerns the statement of the noble scholars about the issue of a court. The scholars have visited us two days ago and proposed the issue of a court, and we discussed a long time, not about accepting the court or not, but the following.
We told the scholars that there are three dangers:
1. The proximity of reaching the area between rural western Aleppo and the areas of the Operation Euphrates Shield and beyond the Operation Olive Branch, and this foreseeable danger is not only for Hayat Tahrir Shaam, rather to us all, the scholars, the entire Jihaad in itself and the arena as a whole. And Zinki is the faction present on the first border between us and that region. Especially since it is confirmed to us that Zinki coordinated with Jaysh Al-Thuwar (SDF) and entered members of it to fight against Hayat Tahrir Shaam. And we have informed the scholars about this and they agreed with the aforementioned danger (reaching the Operation Euphrates Shield territory) from one perspective, and they agreed with our description. However they did not give us any practical guarantees in light of the expected court, to prevent this from happening, because the court does not have the necessary means for it.
2 – Zinki undertaking systematic and organized security operation against us. What are the guarantees to stop them from this even by a court, since the court does not have any power to execute anything to reach this. And it is known that there is no benefit in speaking the truth if it can not be implemented, especially since we have suffered much from this previously.
3 – Zinki recently expanding its foreign relations to a dangerous extent, as they entered a new project with the Americans, in addition to their arrangements with other countries. This posses a grave danger to the arena in general and to us in specific.
Even if some disagree with us over this, then we have a lesson in Astana. As we warned against that path and its disastrous consequences, and no one was convinced by our words at that time, and the conspiracies passed with the participation of those who participated, under the hearing and sight of many scholars and others; and I am not talking about the scholars who visited us in specific.
And in the end there is no practical guarantee that would prevent the repetition of matters like these. This is the origin of the problem, since the duty of the scholars is not limited to mere separation at the time of dispute, or merely showing the transgressing party. Rather they must undertake a number of responsibilities entrusted to them by Allah.
Most importantly: showing the judgment of Allah in such afflictions (Nawaazil) firstly, and taking the necessary legal and practical measures towards this secondly. And since they are unable to deal with this problem which is the root cause of the problem, how can they ask from us to deal with its symptoms only while the cause of the disease remains?!
Oh scholars: treat the root cause first and when we reach the symptoms it will be easy to treat, and a court will become easy and practical and serious. Rather maybe we would not even need a court to begin with.
Summarizing the aforementioned: we agreed with the scholars on a lot of descriptions concerning the reality and the dangers, and we understood each others concerns, but we differed about the method of treatment and the proposed solutions. A court was one of the solutions they proposed among other proposed solutions, and we discussed with them a guarantee that the court would not turn into an instrument with which they can escape and flee and play with time, only to return to the initial status without any practical result and a practical guarantee in this regard.
In this context we say: if Zinki is really seriously concerned about a court, then why did it attack us from four axes?! And when these attempts failed they raised the slogan of accepting a court.
Before the conclusion: the issue is not the rejection of a court let alone arbitration, rather the issue is about ensuring the implementation of what will be decided by the court. And before that: a guarantee to treat the root cause of the problem. Without this we ask those who accuse us of not submitting to a court to look at our words and positions with insight.
Finally: if there is seriousness about treating the root cause of the problem on the arena then we are ready for it, but if the issue is reduced to a court case or only in a statement about who transgressed, then this will shift from the root cause to its branches.
And any solution ensuring that the overall issue will be treated seriously without reducing it, then we are satisfied with it and will support it. And we value the efforts of everyone who makes an effort in these afflictions from the four scholars and others who are keen to stop the spilling of blood and the (in-) fighting.
And praises are due to Allah the Lord of the worlds.”