a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media
The constitution provides for freedom of expression, including for members of the press, and stipulates that restrictions may be imposed only under exceptional circumstances. The government generally respected this right. The law holds journalists criminally responsible for erroneous or false news; threats or blackmail; insult, defamation, and contempt; dishonoring or insulting the president or the president of another foreign country; inciting a crime through a publication; and sectarian provocation.
Freedom of Expression: Individuals were generally free to criticize the government and discuss matters of public interest; however, several legal restrictions limit this right. The law prohibits discussing the honor of the president, insulting him or the president of a foreign country, or defaming public officials, public entities, and individuals. The military code of justice prohibits insulting the security forces, and the Military Court prosecuted civilians under this statute.
On June 8, the ISF summoned freelance journalist Luna Safwan for questioning following a defamation case filed by film director and journalist Jaafar al-Attar, against whom Safwan and several other women had filed a sexual harassment case in 2021.
On June 24, the Military Court summoned stand-up comedian Chaden Fakih for “insulting and mocking the ISF” and fined her for a satirical video she shared on her Instagram page in 2021 in which she asked the ISF for sanitary pads during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown.
Violence and Harassment: Journalists continued to face intimidation and harassment. Political tension led some outlets to fear entering certain areas where Hizballah exercised influence to report without removing branding or logos identifying the outlets. Protesters and security forces attacked or harassed journalists covering protests on several occasion. On December 28, assailants attacked the studios of al-Jadeed TV with a Molotov cocktail and gunfire after the outlet broadcast a comedy sketch implying sexual relations between southern Lebanese women and foreign UN peacekeepers.
On August 3, Hizballah supporters attacked press photographer Hassan Shaaban after he filmed residents of the southern village of Beit Yahoun protesting the water shortage in their homes for several consecutive days. The same assailants reiterated their threat to Shaaban the next day with a bullet hung on his car window.
On August 13, journalist and television host Dima Sadek was the target of a violent campaign on social media, following her posting of a photo of the deceased Iranian Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini with the caption “The Satanic Verses.” Sadek, who posted the image in reaction to the attack on British writer Salman Rushdie on August 12 in New York, stated in her tweet, “I am the subject of a public incitement-to-murder campaign launched by Jawad Nasrallah,” the son of Hizballah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. Sadek accompanied her message with a screenshot of a tweet from another internet user saying that “spilling Dima Sadek’s blood is a moral obligation.” The Skeyes Center for Media and Cultural Freedom denounced this campaign of “incitement and threat for murder and rape.”
Censorship or Content Restrictions for Members of the Press and Other Media, Including Online Media: The law provides rules and conditions for becoming a journalist and for the licensing of new publications.
No specific law regulates online speech. Authorities may prosecute individuals, journalists, and bloggers for what they express online under various laws, including cybercrime statutes.
The law governing audiovisual media bans live broadcasts of unauthorized political gatherings and certain religious events. It also bans any content that promotes a relationship with Israel. Media outlets must receive a Class “A” license from the cabinet to broadcast any type of political news or programs and a Class “B” license for entertainment. The law prohibits broadcasting programs that harm the state or its relations with foreign countries. The law also prohibits the broadcast of programs that seek to harm public morals, ignite sectarian strife, or insult religious beliefs.
Authorities continued to prosecute online, print, and television journalists for violations of the country’s publications law. Prosecutors sometimes referred these cases to criminal courts based on private complaints and their own discretion, but more often they referred these cases to the Publications Court. The Muhal Observatory for Freedom of Expression reported that authorities summoned freelance journalist Marwa Saab on June 20 after she posted a story that angered film director and journalist Jaafar al-Attar. Publications Court cases typically remained open for a year or more and resulted in fines or dismissal.
Authorities selectively applied elements of the law that permit censorship of pornographic material, political opinion, and religious material considered a threat to national security or offensive to the dignity of the head of state or foreign leaders. The General Directorate of Security (DGS) may also review and censor any foreign newspaper, magazine, or book to determine its admissibility into the country, but these reviews were mostly for explicit, pornographic content. Some journalists reported that political violence and extralegal intimidation led to self-censorship.
Libel/Slander Laws: In most cases, criminal courts heard libel and other defamation complaints. Prison sentences ranged from one to three years, but more often, courts ordered fines or the removal of the offending material from the internet. Several human rights NGOs reported that in dozens of cases, authorities filed criminal defamation suits against journalists, bloggers, political activists, and private citizens, to include posts in WhatsApp groups or on Facebook. While these cases rarely resulted in prolonged detentions or jail sentences, interrogations by police and lengthy, expensive trials reportedly created a chilling effect on free speech.
The law prohibits the press from publishing blasphemous content regarding the country’s officially recognized religious groups or content that may provoke sectarian feuds. There were no known prosecutions under this law during the year.
Private citizens may file criminal complaints, which the law requires investigating judges to consider, and frequently did so in defamation cases. Politicians at times responded to allegations of wrongdoing leveled at them by filing criminal complaints alleging defamation.
The ISF Cybercrimes Bureau reported that it had received 295 defamation cases for investigation as of October 6. The bureau reportedly investigated all the referrals of defamation cases during the year, with half of the investigations ongoing at year’s end.
Nongovernmental Impact: Religious figures sometimes sought to rally public sentiment to inhibit freedom of expression, including through coercion and threats of violence. Leaders of Hizballah and the Amal Movement political party cited “foreign interference” as one justification for limiting media publications in areas that they controlled.
Internet Freedom
The law does not restrict access to the internet. The government maintained a monopoly over the internet backbone, as well as over the fixed and mobile telephone infrastructure, and in general exercised tight control over internet service providers (ISPs). Private ISPs obtain a permit by decree from the Ministry of Telecommunications.
The government reportedly restricted access to some websites to block online gambling, pornography, religiously provocative material, extremist ideology, and Israeli websites, but there were no verified reports the government systematically attempted to collect personally identifiable information via the internet. Generally, authorities censored websites through court orders filed with the ISF’s Cybercrimes Bureau, which then issued a final order to the Ministry of Telecommunications. NGOs reported that the ministry did not notify website owners about blockage of their websites and gave owners only 48 hours to file an appeal to have the decision overturned.
Restrictions on freedom of expression concerning government officials applied to social media communications, which authorities typically considered a form of publication rather than private correspondence. Human rights groups reported that political parties and their supporters intimidated individuals online and in person in response to online posts deemed critical of political leaders or religious figures. The ISF’s Cybercrimes Bureau and other state security agencies also summoned journalists, bloggers, and activists for questioning about their social media and blog posts, especially when they criticized political figures or religious sects.
On June 15, security officers visited the home of television journalist Sabine Youssef after the Mount Lebanon appellate court issued an arrest and investigation warrant against her on the charge of insulting the president in a tweet.
On June 25, lawyer and activist Khaled Merheb received death threats after publishing a social media post criticizing the grand mufti’s opposition to the rights of LGBTQI+ persons.
Media reported that Lama Fakih, an employee of HRW researching the Port of Beirut explosion, was targeted with NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware during the year.
Restrictions on Academic Freedom and Cultural Events
There were no reports of government restrictions specific to academic freedom, but libel and slander laws applied.
Most private universities enjoyed freedom of expression, and students could hold student elections and organize cultural, social, and political activities.
The DGS Censorship Bureau reviewed all films and plays. Its decision-making process lacked transparency and reportedly was influenced by religious institutions and political groups. The Censorship Bureau banned Universal Pictures’ Minions: The Rise of Gru on July 8 because of its depiction of an evil nun character. On June 13, it also banned Pixar’s Lightyear because of a same-sex kiss between two of the characters.
b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association
The constitution provides for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights.
Freedom of Peaceful Assembly
The constitution provides for the freedom of peaceful assembly and the government generally respected this right. The Ministry of Interior required organizers to obtain a permit from the Ministry of Interior three days prior to any demonstration.
Security forces occasionally intervened to disperse demonstrations, usually when protesters caused property damage or clashes broke out between opposing protesters. The ISF used tear gas and sometimes rubber bullets to disperse protesters whom authorities alleged were engaging in violence or vandalism, and the LAF in some instances used nonlethal force to disperse protesters who resisted LAF efforts to clear key thoroughfares. NGOs Amnesty International and HRW reported security forces used excessive force against protesters on some occasions.
Freedom of Association
The constitution provides for freedom of association, with some conditions established by law, and the government generally respected the law.
No prior authorization is required to form an association, but organizers must notify the Ministry of Interior to obtain legal recognition, and the ministry must verify that the organization respects “public order, public morals, and state security.” In some cases, the ministry sent an NGO’s notification paperwork to the security forces to initiate inquiries about an organization’s founding members. Organizations must invite ministry representatives to any general assembly where members vote on bylaws, amendments, or seats on the board of directors. The ministry must then validate the vote or election. If the organization fails to comply with these procedures, the Council of Ministers may dissolve it by decree.
The cabinet must license all political parties; however, Hizballah’s “political wing” operated without a license.
In areas under Hizballah’s sway, independent NGOs faced harassment and intimidation, including social, political, and financial pressures.
c. Freedom of Religion
See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.
d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country
The law provides for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation. The government generally respected these rights for citizens but placed extensive limitations on the rights of refugee populations and asylum seekers, most of whom were Palestinian, Syrian, or Iraqi (see section 2.e., Protection of Refugees).
In-country Movement: Nonstate armed groups hindered or prevented movement in areas where they operated. According to the security services, armed members of Hizballah controlled access to some areas, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine prevented access to a border area. Within families, men sometimes exercised considerable control over female relatives, restricting their activities outside the home or their contact with friends and relatives.
Citizenship: Citizenship is derived exclusively from the father. A citizen mother married to a noncitizen father may not transmit Lebanese citizenship to her children (see section 2.g., Stateless Persons).
e. Protection of Refugees
The government continued to call for Syrian refugees to return to Syria but coordinated with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other humanitarian organizations to allow the provision of protection and assistance to refugee residents, returning refugees, or asylum seekers, as well as other persons of concern. Observers noted a relative rise in anti-refugee rhetoric that bordered on incitement to violence against refugees.
According to the latest UNHCR vulnerability assessment of Syrian refugees conducted in 2021, there were approximately 825,000 Syrian refugees in the country registered with UNHCR. Syrian refugees who arrived after 2015, when the government instructed UNHCR to stop registering them, are not included in UNHCR’s numbers, but the agency estimates there are approximately 1.3 million Syrian refugees living in Lebanon. There were no formal refugee camps in the country for Syrians. Most Syrian refugees resided in urban areas, many in unfinished, substandard, or nonresidential buildings. Approximately 20 percent lived in informal tented settlements, often adjacent to agricultural land, according to UNHCR. According to the 2021 UNHCR assessment, refugees often took loans to cover basic needs such as rent, food, and health care, leaving more than 90 percent in debt and food insecure.
Existing immigration rules do not explicitly permit access to the country for refugees and asylum seekers from Syria. Since 2015, authorities have restricted entry of Syrians into the country to individuals in specific categories, such as those with a Lebanese sponsor, traveling for the purposes of transit, or attending a medical or embassy appointment. In March, the DGS removed “displaced” (admitted to the country based on humanitarian grounds) from the list of entry categories for Syrian nationals.
Due to the Syrian government’s hostility toward the refugee population, Syrian refugees faced barriers in obtaining the Syrian identification documents (IDs) required to renew their Lebanese residency permits. The Syrian embassy also charged fees for IDs that were unaffordable for most refugees. Obtaining and maintaining legal residency was also a challenge for refugees of other nationalities, especially Iraqis, due to high renewal fees and sponsorship requirements.
Authorities granted entry visas only to those Palestinian refugees from Syria (PRS) who had a verified embassy appointment, a pre-approved visa from DGS, or an airline ticket and visa to a third country. The duration for most of these visas was only 24 hours.
PRS children up to the age of 15 were included under their parents’ identity card and residency permit. Thereafter they officially must either obtain identity documents in Syria (at the risk of receiving an exit stamp on their identity documents and potentially losing their Lebanese residency) or obtain a passport through the Syrian embassy at a cost of $350, a fee that most PRS could not afford. However, the DGS permitted PRS children above the age of 15 to use their birth certificates as a substitute identity document until age 18.
Access to Asylum: The law does not provide for the granting of asylum or refugee status, and Lebanon is not a party to either the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees or the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.
Refoulement: Although there were no instances of mass refoulement, government officials repeatedly called for the return of Syrian refugees and occasionally threatened to expel them, notwithstanding the protection risks and lack of basic services returnees would face.
In October the DGS resumed facilitated return movements of Syrian refugees conducted prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. UNHCR contacted returnees and maintained a presence at staging sites prior to departure and reported no instances of involuntary or forced returns. The Minister of Displaced Affairs announced in July a plan to return up to 15,000 Syrian refugees per month, but this plan had not gone into effect by year’s end. The Higher Defense Council, a body chaired by the president that includes cabinet ministers and the heads of the security service, enacted a 2019 decision that required deportation of anyone arrested and found to have entered the country illegally thereafter. In the first half of the year, deportations of Syrians increased compared to the same period in 2021, according to UNHCR.
Humanitarian organizations consider the government’s deportation policy, particularly the 2019 Higher Defense Council decision, to have significantly elevated the risk of refoulement because refugees who expressed a credible fear of persecution or torture upon return were often not afforded a formal review before deportation. Human rights groups raised concerns regarding the risk of turning refugees over to Syrian authorities. Although government officials maintained that their deportation policy applied only to illegal migrants and not to asylum seekers, human rights groups observed that the government often failed to respect due process in making its return decisions. UNHCR and international donors continued to urge the government to provide for a judicial or independent administrative review of each case, as well as the consistent application of procedural safeguards before carrying out deportations. The government maintained that it did not have the capacity to hold court hearings on all deportation cases as required by law.
Non-Syrians arrested due to irregular entry or residency faced administrative detention without being sentenced by a court. The DGS held these individuals in a migrant retention facility where officials processed their immigration files before making administrative deportation decisions. Unless a person registered with UNHCR expressed the need for international protection or had already secured resettlement to a third country, cases of this nature typically resulted in the detainee’s deportation.
Abuse of Migrants and Refugees: NGOs and UN agencies continued to report incidents of sexual harassment and exploitation of refugees by employers and landlords, including paying workers below the minimum wage, forcing workers to work excessive hours, debt bondage (see section 7.e., Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement), and pressuring families into agreeing to the early marriage of their daughters, ostensibly to relieve economic hardship (see section 6, Children).
Freedom of Movement: UN agencies reported that local officials frequently used the threat of evictions to exert control over refugees or to appease host communities competing with refugees for jobs and other resources. In July, the LAF began a campaign in the west and central Beka’a Valley to identify “unauthorized” tents in informal settlements and families who had moved in without government approval. Authorities had identified at least 117 such tents and dismantled 45 as of August 11. The affected refugee families had few options for relocation near where they had been living.
In Palestinian refugee camps, self-appointed security committees provided security for refugees through an agreement with the government. Checkpoints operated by government security forces controlled the movement of persons and material into and out of six of the 12 official Palestinian refugee camps.
Authorities imposed curfews in several municipalities across the country, allegedly to improve security of all communities or for public health concerns.
Due to the slow implementation of residency determinations, most Syrian refugees could not renew their legal documents, which significantly affected their freedom of movement due to the possibility of arrest at checkpoints, particularly for adult men. While authorities released most detainees within a few days, some refugees reported that authorities either confiscated their IDs or required them to pay fines before releasing them.
UNHCR staff reported that restrictions on movement increasingly forced families to send children and young women (whom authorities were less likely to stop but who were more vulnerable to exploitation and abuse) to perform family errands.
While there is no official limitation of movement for PRS in the country, PRS without legal status faced de facto obstacles, mainly the threat of arrest at checkpoints.
Syrian refugees in informal settlements and other types of housing continued to face risks of eviction. According to UNHCR, 2,517 Syrians were evicted from their homes between January and the end of September. The number of evicted Syrians rose 21 percent, from 1,028 between April and June to 1,243 from July to September. It was unclear whether this increase in evictions correlated with a rise in government anti-refugee rhetoric during the second half of the year. Both collective and individual evictions occurred with little if any opportunity for legal challenge.
Employment: The government treats both PRS and Syrians as foreigners. As a result, both groups of refugees faced additional disadvantages in the labor market.
To be employed in the formal labor market, Palestinian refugee workers need an annual work permit that the employer must request from the Ministry of Labor. This application process was reportedly often lengthy, cumbersome, and marred with uncertainty.
A lack of written contracts, paucity of employment benefits, and insecure job tenure also contributed to unstable working conditions.
While most non-Syrian Palestinian refugees can get a work permit for free, PRS must pay the same fees for a work permit as other non-Lebanese nationals. PRS are also excluded from participating in the streamlined application process available to other Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. As with Syrian refugees, PRS may obtain a work permit if their employer provides a contract and covers the full cost. If a PRS worker did not have residency, a work permit could be obtained in conjunction with an employment contract. In practice, however, such arrangements were extremely rare.
The law permits Syrian legal residents to work only in the agricultural, construction, and custodial fields. Labor force participation among Syrian women was 16 percent, compared to 81 percent for Syrian men. Enforcement of employment restrictions eased during the year.
Access to Basic Services: The law considers Palestinian refugees registered with the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Middle East (UNRWA) to be foreigners. UNRWA provided health, education, social services, and emergency assistance to registered Palestinian refugees residing in the country. Palestinian refugees continued to face de facto restrictions on accessing national education services. Rising transportation costs associated with increasing use of UNRWA schools constituted a key barrier to accessing education for Palestinian refugee children, many of whom also had to leave school at an early age to earn an income.
Palestinians did not benefit from national sickness and maternity funds or the family allowances fund. UNRWA continued to bear the cost of basic medical, maternity, or family health care expenses (excluding worker’s compensation). Informal restrictions on work in certain industries also left many refugees dependent on UNRWA for education, health care, and social services (see section 7.d.).
The amount of land allocated to the 12 official Palestinian refugee camps in the country has changed only marginally since 1948, despite a four-fold increase in the population. Consequently, most Palestinian refugees lived in overpopulated camps, some of which suffered heavy damage in past conflicts (see also section 2.e., Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons). According to UNRWA, poverty rates increased among Palestinian refugee families from 73 percent in July 2021 to 86 percent in March. Many Palestinian refugees experienced significant difficulties paying for essential goods and services including foodstuffs, electricity, and rent. Many received only a few hours of electricity per day and struggled to access hospitals due to high transportation costs. Increasingly, landlords raised rents and required tenants to pay them in U.S. dollars; Palestinian refugees’ income was in Lebanese pounds, a currency that has lost 95 percent of its value since 2019.
The government did not permit UNRWA to install individual electricity meters in apartments, preferring that UNRWA pay a single bill rather than collecting from individual households as if the occupants were permanent residents of the country. This practice limited Palestinian refugee residents’ access to electricity.
The law prohibits Palestinians from purchasing or inheriting property.
Palestinian refugees who arrived from Syria since 2011 received limited basic support from UNRWA, including food aid, cash assistance, and winter assistance, such as cash to purchase fuel for heating. Authorities permitted children of PRS to enroll in UNRWA schools and access UNRWA health clinics.
Due to delays and closures driven by the economic crisis, student enrollment in public schools declined significantly in the 2021-2022 school year. Official numbers are not yet finalized, but the Ministry of Education and Higher Education reported to UNICEF that around 187,900 Syrian refugee students were enrolled in scholastic year 2021-2022. The ministry estimated that 159,400 children (of all nationalities) were enrolled for the 2022-2023 scholastic year. In addition, approximately 30,000 non-Lebanese students participated in structured educational activities conducted outside of a formal school environment as of the end of June. According to UNHCR estimates, more than one-half of refugee children aged 3 to 18 were not receiving education. Donor funding to UN agencies covered school-related expenses, such as school fees, books, and uniforms.
Syrian refugees had access to many nonprofit and private health centers and local clinics for primary care services, and UN agencies and NGOs funded most of the associated costs with international donor support. Syrian refugees had access to a limited number of UNHCR-contracted hospitals for lifesaving and obstetric care.
Iraqi refugees had access to both the public and private education systems. Iraqi refugees also had access to the primary health care system. UNHCR, through NGOs, provided secondary health care with donor support.
Durable Solutions: The government did not consider local integration of any refugees a viable solution.
f. Status and Treatment of Internally Displaced Persons
Fighting in 2007 destroyed the Nahr el-Bared Palestinian Refugee Camp, displacing its approximately 27,000 residents. Many of the displaced resided in areas adjacent to the camp or in other areas of the country where UNRWA services were available. The reconstruction of the camp, begun in 2008, was approximately 82 percent complete at the end of the year. The balance of the project was not fully funded. Of those displaced following the camp’s destruction, UNWRA expected 20,878 to return to the reconstructed camp; 16,781 had done so as of December. The remaining 6,122 individuals initially indicated they would return to the camp but subsequently opted to settle in a different location. The temporary settlements that provided housing for them near the camp were completely vacated by the beginning of the year. UNRWA began directing the savings in rent and maintenance to the remaining eligible displaced families as cash rental subsidy payments of $75 per month until their homes are reconstructed.
g. Stateless Persons
There were no official statistics on the size of the stateless population. The country contributes to statelessness, including through: discrimination against women in nationality laws; discrimination on other grounds, such as ethnicity, religion, or disability, in nationality laws or their administration in practice; and discrimination in birth registrations.
Citizenship is derived exclusively from the father, resulting in statelessness for children of a citizen mother and a noncitizen father when registration under the father’s nationality is not possible. This legal discrimination particularly affected Lebanese, Palestinians, and, increasingly, Syrians from households headed by women. Undocumented Syrian refugees were unable to register their marriages and the births of their children due to their lack of official status. Additionally, some children born to citizen fathers did not have their births registered due to administrative obstacles or a lack of understanding of the regulations. During the year, the government extended a waiver allowing late registration of Syrian children born in the country since 2011 to be effected administratively instead of through the courts.
Palestinian refugees residing in the country could not obtain citizenship and were not considered citizens of any other country. Palestinian refugee women married to citizens were able to obtain citizenship after one year of marriage. Children of Palestinian refugees faced discrimination in birth registration, as bureaucratic and administrative procedures at the Directorate of Political Affairs and Refugees (DPRA) made it difficult to register these children after the age of one year. According to the law, birth registration of children older than one year requires a court procedure, in some cases an investigation by the DGS, and final approval from the DPRA. Where paternity is in doubt or the applicant is age 18 years more, he or she may also be required to take a DNA test. The birth registration process can take more than a year to complete and is extremely complex to navigate, especially for the DPRA-registered parents of Palestinian refugee children.
UNRWA estimated that 3,000 to 5,000 Palestinians remained unregistered with either it or the government. These Palestinians began to arrive in the country during the 1960s and do not hold any formal valid identification documentation. The government does not recognize their legal status in the country. Nonregistered Palestinians faced restrictions on movement, risked arrest or detention, and encountered obstacles completing civil registration procedures.
Undocumented Palestinians not registered in other countries where UNRWA operates, such as Syria or Jordan, were usually ineligible for the full range of UNRWA services. In most cases, and as part of its discretionary power to include vulnerable groups of Palestinians on an exceptional basis, UNRWA nonetheless provided primary health care, education, and vocational training services to undocumented Palestinians. The majority of these were men, many of them married to UNRWA-registered refugees or Lebanese citizen women, who could not transmit refugee status or citizenship to their husbands or children.
Approximately 1,500 of an estimated 100,000 Kurds living in the country lacked citizenship, despite decades of family presence in the country.
Stateless persons lacked official identity documents that would permit them to travel abroad. They had limited access to the regular employment market and no access to many professions. Additionally, they could neither access public schools or public health care facilities nor register marriages or births. They also could not own or inherit property.