On Wednesday (August 12, 2026), the Lebanese Parliament approved a law proposal aimed at granting a general amnesty and exceptionally reducing some penalties.
The general amnesty is the first of its kind since 1991, and thousands of convicts, detainees, and wanted persons are supposed to benefit from it successively. The stated motive is prison overcrowding, which has been exacerbated by slow trials and years of detention without judicial procedures. But it is likely that political and sectarian reasons were the main reason behind its approval.
Lebanon is “fragile” in the face of any regional changes
For years, Lebanese political forces have called for the law to be approved, but deep divisions have prevented this. The authorities have not yet announced the number of beneficiaries.
The approval of a general amnesty returned to circulation after the overthrow of the previous regime in Syria in late 2024, especially with regard to dealing with the file of those known as “Islamist detainees,” some of whom were arrested against the backdrop of events related to the Syrian conflict without trials.
After the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad, the political context changed, and demands from their families and the Sunni forces that represent them returned to reconsider their conditions and the sentences issued against some of them.
The expert in Middle East affairs and professor of political science, Dr. Khattar Abu Diab, said in an interview with DW Arabia that “there is no evidence or proof that the new Syrian government has any direct influence in approving the amnesty, whether through pressure or wishful thinking.”
The political expert, of Lebanese origin, cites the denial of the Deputy Prime Minister, Tareq Mitri, who is in charge of the relationship with Syria, of any Syrian interference. He added: "We must not forget that the draft law and the discussions around it preceded the fall of Bashar al-Assad."
But the international relations professor added: “There is no doubt that the change in the political climate in the region has weakened Hezbollah’s ability to influence the legislative and judicial authorities. The new situation in Syria has made it easier for those demanding an amnesty for supporters of the Syrian opposition and protests against Bashar al-Assad to move forward with their demands.”
What is the position of Hezbollah, the Free Patriotic Movement?
Representatives of the “Free Patriotic Movement” parliamentary bloc, headed by former President Michel Aoun’s son-in-law, Gebran Bassil, and the “Loyalty to the Resistance” bloc affiliated with Hezbollah, withdrew from the legislative session in the House of Representatives, due to Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s refusal to allow Defense Minister Michel Mansi to read the army’s speech regarding the general amnesty law, during the legislative session.
Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Elias Bou Saab, said in a statement from the House of Representatives after the adoption of the law proposal: “Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has no right to prevent the Minister of Defense from giving his speech in the House of Representatives,” adding that “repeatedly preventing the Minister of Defense from giving a speech in the legislative session is a wrong and unconstitutional decision.”
Political forces demanded that the amnesty include the base of their supporters. Hezbollah requested that the amnesty include thousands of arrested and wanted Shiites from the Baalbek and Hermel regions (east), most of whom are accused of drug crimes and car theft.
Christian parties also demanded that the amnesty include hundreds of families who fled to Israel with the withdrawal of its forces from southern Lebanon in 2000, in light of their fear of reprisals against the backdrop of members’ affiliation with the “South Lebanon Army” that cooperated with the Hebrew state during the years of occupation.
Distributing sweets in Tripoli
The majority of the "Islamist detainees" come from the city of Tripoli, which has a Sunni majority in the north of the country, and they are accused of crimes including fighting the Lebanese army, assaulting it, and carrying out bombings.
Representative Imad Al-Hout indicated, in a statement from the House of Representatives, that “79 Islamist detainees out of 146 will be released from prisons, and from today we will not accept the detention of anyone longer than the legal period of pretrial detention.”
Dozens of men on motorcycles gathered in Tripoli to celebrate the decision. Some were waving flags with the Shahada written on them, chanting “God is great,” and setting off firecrackers.
Shadi Abu Omar, the brother of one of the detainees, said, “We have been waiting for this general amnesty for a long time. We have been waiting for it to do us justice, to lift the injustice against us,” adding, “Today is a wedding in Lebanon.” But he expressed his frustration because it was not "a complete pardon... We hoped it would be a complete pardon to get everyone out of prison."
On July 2, the visit of Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Shaibani to Tripoli was celebrated with a wide public reception in which Syrian flags were raised.
Quotas in the Lebanese way
Executive Director of the "Legal Agenda" in Lebanon, Nizar Saghieh, believes that the law, although it is the result of a "temporary political consensus" between the various major blocs, does not build a real "social consensus" in a country that has long suffered from political and sectarian divisions.
While many controversial issues are managed through settlements between political forces, the general amnesty reflects the quota mechanism, adding to the culture of impunity that has prevailed for decades.
Saghieh believes that the law does not constitute a gateway to strengthening “social cohesion,” in the absence of a path for reconciliation or a general vision that defines the reasons for amnesty and its goals. He says: "All that is happening is a kind of concessions and bargains... The amnesty comes without any real reconciliation, nor any work to amend and reform the laws, nor a general vision regarding the matters that should be pardoned and those that should not be pardoned." He explains that the law, as agreed upon, embodies “an application of the idea of quotas.”
However, some representatives who accompanied the discussions that led to the passage of the law reject this characterization. From Beirut, MP Bilal Abdullah praised a “historic achievement,” stressing that its character was “national and humanitarian” before it was “sectarian.”
In turn, Al-Hout wrote on the
