Written by Joyce houeiss for JNews Lebanon
The inclusion of the proposed media law on the agenda of the Parliament’s general assembly during last July’s session sparked widespread debate. Caught between concerns over tightening restrictions on freedom of expression and doubts regarding a rushed drafting process, urgent questions arise: What does the proposed text actually contain? Are we looking at genuine reform or a reproduction of censorship?
A Legislative Journey Spanning 16 Years
Contrary to rumors framing the proposal as a hasty, last-minute draft, the bill is the product of a long legislative process that began in 2010 and spanned nearly 16 years. Over this time, the text transitioned through the Information and Telecommunications Committee, the Administration and Justice Committee and its subcommittees, up to the Joint Parliamentary Committees.
In its final stages, the bill underwent participatory discussions involving legal experts (most notably former MP Ghassan Moukheiber), the Maharat Foundation, the Union of Journalists, and both the Press and Editors Syndicates.
The Core Reform: Protecting Journalists and Decriminalizing Publishing
At its heart, the draft proposal shifts publishing and freedom-of-speech disputes from criminal jurisdiction to civil liability. It treats disputes regarding reputation or damages as matters of civil compensation rather than criminal offenses that trigger pretrial detention, public prosecution, or security investigations.
Key Reforms Included in the Text:
- Elimination of Criminal Penalties: Prohibits pretrial detention and imprisonment of journalists in publishing cases.
- Adoption of Civil Liability: Financial compensation proportionate to actual damage without security prosecutions.
- Protection of Confidential Sources: Guarantees the freedom of journalistic work and information security.
- Freedom of Establishment: Enables media outlets to be founded via simple notification (“علم وخبر”) rather than complex licensing systems.
- Transparency and Anti-Monopoly Measures: Enhances transparency in ownership and funding, prevents media concentration, and guarantees freedom of union organization.
Abolishing the Publications Court: Is Specialized Justice Lost?
Addressing concerns regarding the abolition of the “Publications Court” and potential fragmentation of jurisprudence across regional civil courts, legal analysis indicates that judicial specialization does not necessarily require a special criminal tribunal.
Reforming the sector means shifting publishing disputes to civil courts, where specialized expertise can be fostered by establishing dedicated civil chambers and conducting judicial training, alongside the role of Courts of Appeal and the Court of Cassation in unifying legal principles.
Independent Regulation Free from Dominance
Regarding sector governance, the proposal establishes an Independent Media Council. This body aims to strike a balance that prevents dominance by the government and political parties on one side, while preventing economic interest groups and regulated media institutions from controlling the regulatory authority on the other.
What Is Required Today?
Civil and reformist groups, led by the Maharat Foundation, agree that the priority today is not to discard the law, but to rectify remaining flaws.
This primarily involves amending Article 104 to remove vague criminalizing provisions such as “false news,” restricting any criminal exception strictly to direct and severe incitement to discrimination, hostility, or violence in accordance with the international Rabat Plan of Action.
Parliament stands before a historic opportunity to enact a modern media law that ends an era of fear and detention—provided that any reinstated criminalizing clauses are removed, ensuring the legislation protects press freedom and the public’s right to information rather than serving as a tool for authority.
