Lebanon’s Judiciary Continues to Undermine Freedom of Expression and Judicial Independence

Beirut Court’s decision to dismiss an appeal challenging the Beirut Bar Association’s (BBA) amendments to the lawyers’ code of ethics is a setback for the rule of law and human rights of lawyers in Lebanon. Thirteen lawyers had submitted two appeals asking the Court of Appeals to cancel the amendments to the lawyers’ code of ethics, which demanded lawyers to seek permission from the President of the BBA before appearing in any public or media engagements, declaring any legal matter on social media, and criticizing the BBA. The appeals argued that such amendments violated the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and granted legal immunity to the BBA’s leadership, protected them from media criticisms, and discouraged exposure of possible corruption allegations.

According to Amnesty International, the amendments had already curtailed legal defence work, including strategic and rights litigation requiring public engagement, campaigning, and advocacy, and threatened negative impacts on people’s access to justice. The coalition of organizations was alarmed by the Court of Appeals’ decision, which gave undue power to the BBA, reinforced the repressive environment and restricted lawyer’s ability to contribute to constructive public debates, inform the public, and expose officials’ misconduct.

“Lawyers, like other citizens, are entitled to certain human rights, including freedom of expression. In particular, lawyers have the right to take part in public discussions concerning the law, administration of justice, and human rights promotion without facing professional restrictions by reason of their lawful action or membership in a lawful organization”, said the Coalition for Freedom of Expression.

The Beirut Bar Association’s amendment, which has already restricted lawyers from discussing cases pending before the judiciary, went further to curtail such lawyers further, demanding them to seek permission before engaging in conferences, legal seminars, interviews with media outlets, social media outlets, websites, or groups without specifying any process. Media outlets, including non-profit advocacy organizations, were also not spared, making advocacy work more challenging in Lebanon.

Nizar Saghieh, the executive director of the Legal Agenda, a Beirut-based non-profit research and advocacy organization, was among the 13 lawyers who filed the appeals in March. Saghieh’s criticism of the amendments led to him being summoned by the BBA Council to a hearing on April 20. No decision has yet been reached, placing him at risk of disbarment as a punishment for opposing the change peacefully. The BBA should commit to upholding the rule of law and constitutionally-guaranteed freedom of expression, and the authorities guarantee freedom of expression and the free flow of information.

The appeal’s rejection by the Beirut Court of Appeals is a missed opportunity for promoting human rights and upholding the rule of law. Amnesty International and the Coalition for Freedom of Expression call on the BBA to reverse the arbitrary decision, respect international law, and promote human rights. The judiciary should work towards upholding the constitution and human rights and ensure Lebanese citizens’ access to justice.

## The Rule of Law and Human Rights Upheld

The Beirut Court of Appeals’ rejection of the appeals challenging the amendments to the lawyers’ code of ethics is a disheartening setback for the rule of law and human rights in Lebanon. The amendments by the Beirut Bar Association have taken away lawyers’ freedom of speech, right to public discourse and access to information, choosing to stifle voices that should be heard. Lawyers play a pivotal role in advancing human rights, such as providing strategic litigation and advocating for marginalized groups. Such amendments not only further entrench the authoritarian environment in Lebanon but also underline the state’s failure to uphold the rule of law.

H2 The Implications of the Rejection

The rejection of the appeals against restrictions to freedom of speech and subsequent implications cuts deeper than the immediate effect on lawyers. It reflects the state’s weak commitment to protecting human rights and promoting the rule of law. The amendments undermine the freedom of speech and independence of the judiciary, two crucial elements for a thriving democracy. By extension, it creates a culture of silence where human rights violations are normalized, and those who would have spoken get either subdued or eliminated.

Amnesty International and the coalition of organizations caution that the long-term effect of such amendments is deep-rooted repression and silencing of human rights activists and other voices of dissent. Ultimately, this takes away the power of the marginalized and vulnerable groups, leaving them unprotected and exposing them to rampant violations. Therefore, this decision is a grave concern for Lebanese citizens and legal practitioners who believe in the sanctity of human rights and freedom of expression.

H2 Upholding United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers

It is essential to note that Lebanon is signatory to the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, which advocates for rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, and the right to establish and join self-governing professional organizations. Additionally, the principles act to safeguard the independence of lawyers, allowing them to discharge their duties without fear or favour.

The rejection of the appeals directly contravenes these principles as it curtails the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and could have negative impacts on the independence of lawyers. The BBA has undue power, which could make it challenging for lawyers to fulfil their core duty-legal defence work, including strategic and rights litigation that requires public engagement, campaigning and advocacy. Therefore, upholding the UN Basic Principles on the role of lawyers should be at the centre of ensuring the rule of law and human rights in Lebanon.

H2 Editorial and Advice

In conclusion, the Beirut Court of Appeals’ decision is a missed opportunity to promote human rights and uphold the rule of law in Lebanon. The amendments to the lawyers’ code of ethics by the BBA, which curtail freedom of speech, freedom of association, and access to information, undermine the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law. The authorities should respect international law and protect human rights for all Lebanese citizens.

We strongly advise the BBA to reverse all the arbitrary decisions it has taken and respect the constitution, international treaties, conventions, and other agreements that guarantee human rights and freedom of speech. The rejection of the appeals to the amendments is a call for the international community to scrutinize Lebanon’s commitment to international human rights standards and to make necessary corrections to promote a thriving democracy.

Justice-judiciary,Lebanon,freedomofexpression,judicialindependence