The legislation replaces a 30-year-old law and aims to regulate a rapidly changing media landscape, but concerns over Article 104 have sparked fears of renewed pressure on journalists and press freedom.
Lebanese Minister of Information Paul Morcos wrote on his X account after the end of the parliamentary session, Tuesday, August 11, "Congratulations on the New Media Law, which comes to replace a law that is 30 years old."
The Lebanese Parliament passed the Media Law as it came from the joint parliamentary committees, without amendments, in a step that redraws the framework for the law regulating the media sector in its various categories, from journalism and publications to television, radio, and electronic websites, with an independent national body to be established to assume part of the regulation of the sector and monitor the implementation of the law."
The "congratulations" from the Minister of Information were supposed to bring satisfaction and relief to the Lebanese, specifically to the two unions of editors and media professionals. However, what happened created a state of division that accompanied the passage of this law between rejecting it and welcoming it, particularly since it addresses the modern era that keeps pace with digital media, in order to control the media laxity taking place amid a media space that has become uncontrolled, with the emergence of media "broadcast" platforms, for example, which do not require any prior license from the official authorities.
This law came at a time when our world is experiencing the flow of information and its rapid spread, which can sometimes precede any media or news coverage, allowing media manipulation, or what is called the "media lie," to emerge, which may turn into a reality in the absence of controls. The matter does not stop here, but the language and media discourse have changed to the point that the language of defamation, accusations of treason, or bullying has become among the languages used under the title of "expression of opinion."
For this reason, the team supporting this media law believes that its passage is more than necessary; it is a move toward the stage of implementation and accountability, so that it does not allow the falsification of facts or the dissemination of fabrications at a time when Lebanese media channels have begun hosting anyone and everyone under the title of "political activist." This is why the media law was passed, not for the purpose of restriction and generalization in a country that breathes democracy, but as a means of regulation and returning media language to its creators.
Similarly to Lebanon, China has enacted strict laws and regulatory measures targeting influential content creators on social media platforms, preventing them from offering advice or speaking in sensitive specialized fields without proving that they possess scientific qualifications or recognized academic certificates. These regulatory rules entered into force under the supervision of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) to limit the spread of misleading information and protect users.
There is no dispute that the Lebanese Media Law was in need of passage and amendment, particularly since the most significant part of its provisions was placed under the Syrian tutelage of the former regime headed by Hafez al-Assad, which imposed a "reversed" public opinion in line with the interests of the regime and those in charge of it. This is why the press in Lebanon was subjected to harassment, and journalists to assassination, for example, the assassinations of Samir Kassir and Gebran Tueni, and others who carried the banner of opposition to the Syrian presence and influence in Lebanon.
The need was urgent and this step was necessary, but those who object fear a return to the era of the Syrian regime's media dominance in its Lebanese version. This is why their objection focused specifically on Article 104 of the law, which came as an exception, stipulating that anyone who deliberately fabricates misleading information or publishes false news shall be punished with imprisonment for a period ranging from 3 months to 3 years, in addition to a fine or one of the two penalties.
Objection is justified to prevent the state from transforming into a police force fabricating cases against any journalist publishing an article opposing its course. However, this doesn’t preclude the proposal for modification of this law, as long as there is openness from the government to address the presented concerns, considering that no one is above the law and people's dignity and fears must be safeguarded by those who form the fourth estate in Lebanon.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar.
Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter
