LEBANON – Imagine a journalist publishes a story that angers a powerful official.
Under the current system, the journalist could face a criminal case and, in some cases, detention. The new Media Law Bill aims to change this.
In an interview with Enmaeya, the Maharat Foundation said this is one of the bill’s main reforms. It considers the bill an important step forward compared with Lebanon’s old media laws.
The main idea is simple, move from punishment to responsibility.
Instead of treating defamation and other media-related offenses as crimes, the bill would mainly deal with them through civil courts. It would also remove prison sentences for media offenses and ban pretrial detention in cases involving freedom of expression.
But the bill also raises some concerns.
More Protection for Journalists
The bill would give journalists and their sources stronger protection.
It would also protect journalists’ right to join unions and support their editorial independence.
But Maharat says laws alone are not enough. Journalists also need independent courts, stronger unions and real action when journalists are attacked.
What About Websites?
The bill also tries to update Lebanon’s media laws for the digital age.
Websites would not need a license before they start operating. Instead, they could use a notification system.
Anyone could create a website. But a website that wants to be recognized as a professional media outlet would notify the National Media Authority and follow transparency rules.
This means people should be able to know who owns a media outlet and who funds it.
There is one important condition in Article 63: the person legally responsible for a website must be Lebanese.
This means that non-Lebanese people can own and help run a website, but they cannot be its legally responsible manager.
The "Fake News" Issue
One of Maharat’s main concerns is Article 104, which deals with false news and disinformation.
The question is: Who decides what is fake?
Could a journalist face legal action because some information in a story turns out to be wrong? What if the journalist published the information honestly and new facts appeared later?
Maharat says this could bring criminal punishment back into media law, even though the bill is supposed to reduce criminal punishment for journalists.
The foundation instead supports tools such as the right to reply, compensation when someone is harmed, fact-checking and media education.
What About Hate Speech?
The bill also covers hate speech.
Maharat says there must be clear rules before something is considered hate speech. These should look at the context, the speaker, the intention, the content, how widely it was shared and whether it could cause immediate harm.
These criteria come from the Rabat Plan of Action, a UN framework designed to help determine when speech crosses the line from protected freedom of expression into incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.
The framework stresses that not every offensive or hateful statement should automatically be treated as criminal hate speech; authorities should assess the circumstances and the actual risk of harm before imposing restrictions.
What Can Lebanon Learn From the Region?
Lebanon is not the only country facing these questions.
Jordan’s Cybercrime Law has been criticized for some of its rules and penalties on online content.
Tunisia introduced stronger protections for press freedom after 2011.
Morocco also has rules protecting journalists, including the protection of sources.
The lesson is simple: a good law on paper is not enough.
Courts and media regulators must also be independent, and the law must be applied fairly.
Why Civil Courts?
The bill would move media cases away from the Press Court, criminal courts and military courts and into the civil justice system.
This gives people more chances to challenge a decision.
If someone disagrees with a first court ruling, they can ask an appeals court to review it. In certain cases, they can then challenge the decision before the Court of Cassation.
In simple terms, this gives people more opportunities to defend themselves and ask for a decision to be reviewed.
But this system depends on an independent judiciary.
What About AI?
Artificial intelligence is another challenge.
Maharat says the law should not try to create rules for every new technology because technology changes very quickly.
Instead, the law should focus on basic rights and responsibilities. Separate rules can deal with technology companies and digital platforms.
The focus should be on transparency and platform responsibility, rather than automatically punishing people for using tools such as deepfakes.
What Needs to Change?
For Maharat, the most urgent issue is Article 104. It wants false news removed as a criminal offense.
It also wants Article 105 reviewed to clearly explain which old criminal provisions have been removed.
But passing the law will not be enough.
Lebanon will also need an independent National Media Authority, independent courts, stronger journalists’ unions, ways for people to request corrections or compensation, and more investment in fact-checking and media education.
The goal is not to have a media sector without rules.
It is to have fair and clear rules that protect journalists while holding them responsible when real harm occurs.
