In collaboration with Centre for Law and Democracy (which authored the reports), and with the support of the United Nations Democracy Fund (UNDEF), the Samir Kassir Foundation (SKF) evaluated some of the most prominent Lebanese judicial rulings related to freedom of opinion, expression, and the press. This evaluation was conducted from the perspective of international law, best practices, and human rights principles. Some of these verdicts have contributed to upholding freedoms, while others have restricted fundamental rights and liberties. The first case study examined the ruling issued in favor of the “Nida’ Al-Watan” newspaper on November 21, 2019, which ordered the cessation of proceedings in the case filed by the Public Prosecution against the newspaper, on charges of “insulting the dignity of the President of the Republic.” The second case study explored the ruling issued in favor of the Alternative Press Syndicate on December 17, 2021, in the case brought against it by Lebanon Press Editors’ Syndic
ate, which aimed to muzzle the Alternative Syndicate. The third case study focused on the ruling issued by the Military Court against stand-up comedian Shaden Fakih on June 24, 2022, in a case brought against her by the Internal Security Forces. The fourth case study examined the ruling issued by 11th chamber of the civil appellate court of Beirut on May 12, 2023, in the case opposing the Beirut Bar Association to several lawyers, including Legal Agenda co-founder Nizar Saghieh, who were contesting the repressive direction that the Bar Association has imposed on its members. The fifth and final case study delved into the ruling and the prison sentence issued by judge Rosine Hojeily on July 10, 2023, in a case opposing TV journalist Dima Sadek to Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Gebran Bassil. This evaluation process sheds light on Lebanon’s responsibilities and obligations under international human rights agreements. Lebanon is a party to several treaties, most notably the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR), which upholds freedom of expression (Article 19). The objective is to assess whether the judicial rulings align with the principles enshrined in these international treaties. One significant aspect of this assessment is to scrutinize how these rulings address the safeguarding of journalists, who play a pivotal role in exposing corruption and abuse. Additionally, we aimed to determine whether defamation laws in Lebanon are being employed to suppress freedom of expression. Furthermore, we intended to assess the impartiality and independence of the judiciary in the cases under consideration. Finally, we examined whether these rulings facilitate or obstruct access to information, particularly in cases related to the public interest, as international best practices emphasize the importance of transparency and access to information for a functioning democracy.
Source: National News Agency-Lebanon