Lebanon Plans to Abolish Death Penalty, Justice Must Not Rely on Death

A seminar addressing the draft law to abolish the death penalty in Lebanon was held under the invitation of the Italian Embassy, in cooperation with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UHCHR) and the Lebanese Association for Civil Rights (LACR). The event took place at the Italian Embassy in Baabda on the road to the Presidential Palace, with the attendance of Italian Ambassador Fabrizio Martello, Justice Minister Adel Nassar, head of the Parliamentary Human Rights Committee Michel Moussa, founder of the National Campaign to Abolish the Death Penalty in Lebanon Ougarit Younan, alongside legal experts and interested parties.

Italian Ambassador Fabrizio Martello opened the session by welcoming attendees and expressing honor in hosting the discussion in collaboration with the United Nations Human Rights Office, the Lebanese Association for Civil Rights, and the University of Nonviolence and Human Rights. He extended gratitude to all partners who made the initiative possible, especially those who have persistently worked over many years to keep the issue of abolishing the death penalty on Lebanon’s public agenda.

Martello noted the timing of the meeting as particularly significant, explaining that the event was originally scheduled two days earlier but was deliberately postponed in hopes that the Lebanese Parliament would have taken the historic step of abolishing the death penalty by then. Although that had not occurred, he emphasized that the absence of a final decision should not be seen as a setback. The parliamentary debate remains open, preserving Lebanon’s opportunity to make a pivotal advancement in human rights.

He highlighted that Lebanon has effectively maintained a moratorium on executions for over twenty-two years, yet the death penalty remains part of its legal framework, and courts continue to issue death sentences. The draft law has successfully passed parliamentary committee stages and now awaits presentation before the general assembly. The question before Parliament is no longer whether Lebanon can exist without carrying out executions — a fact proven over two decades — but whether this established practice should be codified into clear and permanent legislation.

Martello acknowledged the serious security challenges Lebanon has faced over many years, including terrorism and political violence, and stated that democratic institutions’ decisions carry greater weight given these realities. Whether the Parliament ultimately adopts the law is a sovereign decision belonging exclusively to Lebanon and its democratic institutions.

He stressed that the goal of the day’s discussion was not to preempt the parliamentary decision but to encourage an informed, respectful, timely, and inclusive dialogue on issues concerning justice, human dignity, and the role of the state. Italy has long regarded the abolition of the death penalty as a fundamental human rights objective, deeply rooted in its constitutional values and guiding its international work for decades.

Martello added that Italy proudly initiated the first United Nations General Assembly resolution calling for a global moratorium on executions in 2007 and has remained a leading supporter of this initiative. He emphasized the belief that respect for life and justice are complementary values, not contradictory, and despite setbacks worldwide, the global trend continues toward abolition. Currently, a clear majority of UN member states have either abolished the death penalty or ceased its implementation, reflecting a growing international conviction that justice can protect society while fully respecting human dignity.

He noted that Lebanon’s more than two decades of security alongside a moratorium on executions demonstrate that public safety and non-application of the death penalty are not incompatible. The ongoing legislative debate is grounded in institutional practice rather than theory. Martello praised the constructive role played by the Parliamentary Administration and Justice Committee and the Human Rights Committee chaired by MP Michel Moussa, whose diligent work across political affiliations has helped advance the proposal within the parliamentary process and ensured it receives the institutional attention it deserves given its constitutional and ethical significance.

He acknowledged the exceptional persistence of Lebanese civil society institutions, legal researchers, parliamentarians, and successive public officials who have kept this issue alive through years marked by political crises, economic difficulties, and conflicts. Their commitment merits recognition regardless of individual positions on the draft law.

Martello remarked that Lebanon is engaged in an ambitious process of rebuilding its institutions and strengthening citizens’ trust in the rule of law. Legislative reforms that enhance the judiciary’s credibility, justice, and humanity naturally form part of this broader national effort. Justice is measured not only by its capacity to punish offenders but also by its ability to uphold the values on which democratic societies are founded. Embassies serve as places of diplomacy but should also be venues for dialogue. He expressed honor that representatives from the executive branch, Parliament, judiciary, the United Nations, civil society, and academia responded to the invitation to reflect together on this important issue.

Although Parliament has yet to finalize its stance, Martello affirmed that the day’s discussion remains equally important and timely, occurring while enlightened public reflection can still accompany the democratic process. He expressed confidence that the exchange of views would be thoughtful, respectful, and fruitful, thanks to the diverse expertise represented by those present.

He concluded by expressing sincere appreciation for Justice Minister Adel Nassar’s leadership and commitment, MP Michel Moussa’s important role in the Human Rights Committee’s legislative follow-up, the steadfast support of the United Nations Human Rights Office for human rights promotion in Lebanon, and the principled defense by the Lebanese Association for Civil Rights and the University of Nonviolence and Human Rights over nearly three decades, which made the day’s discussion possible.

Justice Minister Adel Nassar then addressed the gathering, expressing deep feelings of disappointment and frustration but also unwavering determination. He spoke of a disappointment that could breed doubt but affirmed a firm conviction that mediocrity must never prevail. Even when it seems to advance, resistance must continue until victory is achieved. He recalled the words of writer Albert Camus, whom he greatly admires, who wrote, "One must imagine Sisyphus happy." Nassar apologized to Camus for not feeling happy but asserted that Sisyphus will ultimately reach his goal because they refuse to surrender to fate.

Nassar explained that the draft law aiming to abolish the death penalty, initially submitted by several MPs and approved by two parliamentary committees, was obstructed when a parliamentary bloc, which had been among the proponents and publicly supported the bill, deliberately caused a quorum failure. He stated that no justification can excuse such a maneuver. A law of such importance to Lebanon, serving as a beacon for fundamental rights in this troubled region, deserved far better treatment. However, he vowed not to give up, not to retreat, not to bow their heads, and not to lose hope.

He affirmed their commitment to continue the struggle for reform and progress with relentless resolve. Another parliamentary session will be held, and, as in the previous session, he and Dr. Moussa will exert every effort to ensure the bill is prioritized on the Parliament’s agenda. He stressed that their determination remains firm and unshakable. The law will be passed because Lebanon must abolish the death penalty. It must do so despite the atrocities it has endured, despite wars, crimes, and acts of terrorism, despite vile foreign interventions. It must do so because this is its mission. Lebanon understands more than any other country the meaning of killing and dying. It must abolish the death penalty while maintaining an absolute rejection of crime and with unwavering compassion for victims of heinous crimes. The republic must never again decide that a person should die. Its judicial system must condemn death, not resort to it.

Nassar highlighted the horrific dilemma any person might face when deciding whether another should live or die. The humanitarian situation alone constitutes an argument for abolishing the death penalty. Judges are human and judge other humans; they must never forget this. Depriving a person of liberty is not a lenient punishment, and ending a human life does not bring solace to the victim’s family. Victims have the right to demand justice, and it is the state’s duty to provide it. Abolishing the death penalty does not diminish accountability but rejects death as a tool for accountability. He stated, "We must demand justice, not death. Death does not heal wounds." Lebanon has suffered all forms of crime and continues to suffer injustice. They know the cost of suffering, yet they will not demand death because revenge and bloodshed solve nothing; they do not bring peace but increase pain’s bitterness. Julian Green once said, 'One should not sentence a person to death because we do not know what death is.' We must not add another unknown to all the uncertainties surrounding the offender’s character and the judicial process."

He noted that Lebanon will abolish the death penalty, even as some in the Middle East have reinstated it selectively or use it to silence political opponents. Lebanon is destined to be different in this part of the world. Freedom, life, diversity, and democracy have endured there despite persistent opposing forces.

Nassar observed that politics often becomes synonymous with sarcasm and distrust in Lebanon and elsewhere, but politics will regain its nobility. He likened Lebanese people to the cedar tree: its trunk represents the shared culture born of sectarian interaction, while its branches reflect diversity. Cutting the trunk kills the tree; cutting the branches leaves it bare. Both trunk and branches are committed to fundamental rights and human dignity.

He concluded by stating that the Lebanese people deserve never to see them give up. He quoted Paul Valéry: "The wind blows; we must try to live." They will continue living no matter how strong the winds become.

MP Michel Moussa then spoke, declaring his defense of the complete and unconditional abolition of the death penalty in Lebanese legislation. Lebanon has not carried out any execution since January 17, 2004, effectively living under a moratorium on executions for over twenty-two years. He said the country has already taken this crucial step, albeit without explicit declaration. Now is the time to enshrine this reality in law and transform the practice into a constitutional and legal principle. Abolishing the death penalty is not a sign of weakness but evidence of moral strength and democratic maturity.

Moussa presented four main arguments:

First, the death penalty contradicts human rights and Lebanese values. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which Lebanon helped draft in 1948, affirms in Article 3 the inalienable right to life. The death penalty violates this fundamental right and constitutes cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, contrary to Article 5 of the same declaration. In Lebanon, a land of coexistence and Christian and Islamic values, life is sacred. It is inconceivable that the state legally retains the right to kill. A state that prohibits killing must not commit the act it punishes. This is an intolerable moral paradox.

Second, the death penalty is ineffective and does not protect society. Major international studies by the United Nations and various criminology institutes have shown that the death penalty does not have a deterrent effect greater than life imprisonment. Serious crimes occur at the same or higher rates in countries applying the death penalty. In Lebanon, executing a convicted person after years of waiting solves nothing; it does not bring victims back to life nor deter organized criminals who often believe they can evade justice. True protection lies in judicial reform, strengthening security forces, and combating poverty and exclusion, which are the true breeding grounds for crime.

Third, there is an irreversible risk of judicial error. Human justice is fallible, and this is well known. Lebanon’s judiciary is subject to political and sectarian pressures, sometimes coerced confessions, and incomplete investigations, increasing this risk. Many death row inmates have spent years awaiting execution, enduring ongoing psychological torment. What if one is innocent? Such an error can never be corrected. Abolition eliminates this inhumane risk.

Fourth, the death penalty is discriminatory and perpetuates inequality. In Lebanon, as elsewhere, it disproportionately affects the poorest, those unable to afford good legal defense, foreigners, and certain social groups. Influential individuals, political criminals, or those with protection often escape the maximum penalty.

Moussa emphasized that maintaining the death penalty means accepting a two-tier justice system. Abolition would send a clear message that human dignity is non-negotiable regardless of the crime or the accused’s social status. It would also enhance the credibility of Lebanon’s judicial system in the eyes of both the world and its own people.

He acknowledged that some argue for retaining the death penalty for the most serious crimes such as terrorism, premeditated murder, and rape followed by murder. He respectfully responded that modern societies have means to protect citizens without resorting to physical exclusion. True life imprisonment without early release for the most serious crimes constitutes a sufficiently severe and proportionate punishment. Lebanon stands at a crossroads, with several political forces and civil society, including the Lebanese Association for Civil Rights and other organizations, proposing practical solutions. Abolishing the death penalty would be a victory for all democratic forces in the country and send a strong message reflecting modernization and commitment to human rights as Lebanon seeks to rebuild itself and regain international trust. Abolition does not express naivety but affirms that justice must be humane, rehabilitative when possible, and protective of society in all cases. It confirms that Lebanon chooses life even when facing those who sought to destroy it.

He concluded by calling on his colleagues to support the bill and vote for abolition. He urged Lebanon to join, once and for all, the ranks of countries that have chosen moral progress. History will judge them not by their capacity to impose the death penalty but by their ability to protect every human life and dignity. Long live Lebanon, and long live justice worthy of its people.