Despite Lebanese parliamentary joint committees reaching a consensual formula yesterday, 19 May, for the proposed general amnesty law , protests erupted in the streets, particularly by Islamist detainees, rejecting exceptions they believe would limit their actual benefit from the law.
This prompted Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to postpone the plenary session scheduled for tomorrow to discuss and approve it.
Berri's media office said that postponing tomorrow's session to a later date, under the slogan of "consensus", came because of what occurred and was witnessed in more than one area, accompanied by sectarian incitement, "despite the efforts made by parliamentary bodies and joint committees to reach national consensus that would serve as a unifying sign in a country most in need of solidarity and consensus".
It added that "the proposed amnesty law and the exceptional reduction of some sentences aim to restore consideration to the principle of justice as one of the pillars of a state governed by law and a guarantee of individual freedoms, especially since the situation in prisons has been marked by chronic delays in issuing criminal rulings". Islamist detainees in Lebanese prisons issued a statement yesterday warning against a law they described as a "trap to entrench injustice", calling on the three presidents and MPs to reject this proposal and seriously work on amending provisions that specifically harm them.
Protests erupted last night and this morning in several areas, especially in the north and the Beka'a region, including burning tyres and road closures, in protest against exceptions in the proposed formula that they believe do not achieve justice and equality among the categories covered by the general amnesty.
Protesters demanded an amnesty covering all detainees and convicts, noting that broadening exceptions, modifying prison terms in the proposed formula, and other provisions would obstruct the immediate release of several wanted individuals, most notably Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir , who was sentenced to death by the military court and whose case is considered one of the contentious files.
This file is considered one of the most sensitive domestic issues amid political and sectarian divisions surrounding it, and disagreements are primarily linked to detainees accused of terrorism crimes and killing Lebanese army personnel, those referred to as "Islamist detainees", and detainees accused of corruption or drug-related crimes.
The issue of Lebanese deportees to Israel has also emerged as contentious, amid ongoing negotiations with Israel in Washington and the promotion by some Lebanese media outlets of "their cause" alongside narratives of the injustice they faced.
Recently, Maronite Patriarch Bechara Boutros al-Rahi called for the amnesty law to address their situation, in accordance with the law issued in 2011 on this issue, which stipulates that "Lebanese citizens from the South Lebanon Army militia who fled to the occupied territories at any time shall be subject to a fair trial upon their return to Lebanon ".
Deputy Parliament Speaker Elias Bou Saab said after a meeting of the parliamentary bureau on Tuesday evening, "We reached a formula acceptable to the overwhelming majority in parliament, and the required number of MPs' votes exists to pass the amnesty law according to what we agreed upon in the joint committees." Main provisions In his remarks, Bou Saab announced that among the most prominent amendments adopted were setting prison terms for death penalty crimes at 28 years, meaning approximately 21 effective prison years, and 17 prison years for life sentences with hard labour.
He stressed that the proposal preserved the right of families of army martyrs not to waive their personal rights before the civil judiciary.
According to information obtained by The New Arab , among the most prominent amendments was also a reduction in penalties to one-third, while adopting the provisions of Law 194, issued in 2011 regarding deportees, and declaring its rulings enforceable.
Amnesty would be granted for crimes committed before 1 March 2026.
Exceptions included a broad list of crimes, including intentional or premeditated murder against civilians and military personnel, crimes referred to the Judicial Council, felony drug crimes in cases of repeat offences or multiple rulings or prosecutions, crimes of treason, espionage and illegal ties with Israel, crimes involving assault on public property and public funds, and crimes stipulated in anti-corruption and illicit enrichment laws.
Informed parliamentary sources told The New Arab that "the current formula is not final, and amendments may still be introduced, as many observations and divisions are surrounding it. Therefore, not all disagreements have been resolved." 'A hybrid and composite legislative proposal' In this context, head of the legal department at Justice Pioneers, lawyer Haitham Azzo, said that "the issuance of a general amnesty law for specific acts automatically leads to the dropping of prosecution or punishment for acts covered by it, considering that the public rights case itself expires by force of law".
Azzo added, "In practical terms in Lebanon , approaches to general amnesty laws are often influenced by the nature of the complex sectarian environment governing parliamentary balances, where the legal text is not always discussed separately from political alignments and considerations shaping parliamentary representation with a sectarian dimension."
"The amnesty law takes on the label of a sectarian bargaining law, in line with the '6 and 6' repeated formula, reflecting the extent of divergence in political approaches to this file more than expressing the actual necessities of social justice stipulated in the explanatory memorandum of the law," he noted.
Azzo pointed out that the proposed draft is a "composite and hybrid legislative proposal in terms of its legal structure, because it exceeds established penal concepts in some aspects and reformulates the punishment system in a way that does not align with classifications known in jurisprudence and comparative judiciary systems".
He further said that "the proposal, for example, seeks to convert the death penalty into a fixed-term sentence of 28 years' imprisonment, based on nine effective months for each year, whereas execution, in its legal essence, means completely ending the life of the convicted person, not converting it into a custodial sentence with a time limit".
"Legislative problems of a technical nature extend to distorting the mechanism of merging rulings, as the proposal reformulated the established legal rule based on implementing the harshest sentence when multiple rulings are issued against one person," Azzo argued. "It added a new calculation mechanism requiring the inclusion of one-quarter of the sentences issued in other cases against the person in the final sentence, effectively raising the level of the harshest sentence through the relative accumulation of the remaining sentences. This creates a transformation in the legal philosophy of 'merging' from the logic of punitive absorption to the logic of punitive accumulation."
He continued, "However, despite the structural problems affecting the proposal, it must be noted positively that it attempts to address one of the most sensitive problems in the penal system, represented by the phenomenon of unlimited pretrial detention in some crimes excluded under Article 108 of the Criminal Procedure Code, particularly in murder felonies and felonies posing a comprehensive danger."
"The proposal requires the release of detainees who have spent up to 14 years in prison without final rulings being issued against them, constituting an exceptional treatment for a highly complex legal situation that has long raised issues regarding guarantees of personal freedom", he said. Azzo warned that the most dangerous aspect is the shift from a situation marked by judicial incapacity to prosecute influential figures due to political interference and the absence of genuine judicial independence to more dangerous conditions.
He said this would amount to legitimising impunity through official legal texts that transform theft and embezzlement from crimes that should be prosecuted and punished into acts that can be erased under parliamentary amnesty cover, effectively undermining the very concept of justice itself. Article translated from Arabic by Afrah Almatwari. To read the original, click here .