Idea Transcript
Introduction Historically, Lebanon has been portrayed as a center of human rights and freedoms in the Arab world. Freedom of expression is enshrined in the Lebanese Constitution 1 as well as in the international treaties signed by Lebanon. In practice, however, Lebanese citizens have been dealing with censorship of art for decades. Films, books, music and theater have been subject to censorship at the hands of the Lebanese authorities since the 1940s. The level of censorship and the content censored has various throughout the year in no specific direction. Films were the most censored material of the 1950’s, the 1960’s, the 1980’s and the 2000’s with a total of 95 films reportedly censored. Music was the most censored form of art of the 90’s with a total of 88 reported musicrelated materials censored. As for press, it was the most censored material of the 70s (11 incidents). When looking closely at all censorship cases, from the 1940s onwards, censorship reasons can be grouped in seven categories: politics, religion, sexual content, Israel, Jewish, homosexuality, and offensive to image. Still, different eras saw various types of censorship. For example, Israel-related material was widely censored during the 1960s, due to “political reasons”, whereas in the 1990s, at the end of the Lebanese Civil War, the main driver of censorship was religion. Today, amidst raging political conflicts in the region, censorship for political or image offensive reasons are currently experiencing a record high whereas the censorship of sexual content is decreasing. 1 Preamble of the Lebanese constitution: ‘…C- Lebanon is a parliamentary democratic republic based on respect for public liberties, especially the freedom of opinion and belief, and respect for social justice and equality of rights and duties among all citizens without discriminations’ Article 8 Individual liberty is guaranteed and protected by law. No one may be arrested, imprisoned, or kept in custody except according to the provisions of the law. No offense may be established or penalty imposed except by law. Article 13 The freedom to express one’s opinion orally or in writing, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom of association shall be guaranteed within the limits established by law.
For a long time, Lebanon’s diverse media environment, and especially Lebanon’s internet, was still considered free and uncensored. The internet was a place where Lebanese citizens found a platform not controlled by the authorities, where they enjoyed access to a wide variety of views and perspectives and could freely express themselves, as well as conduct campaigns to promote government accountability. Due to a lack of regulation and accountability, censorship of internet activities is on the rise in Lebanon. The abuse of censorship practices has now reached worrying levels. Today, online activists, online journalists, bloggers, and regular internet users are being subject to growing pressure by Lebanon’s censorship authorities and this is severely affecting freedom of expression. In this report, we will present the cases of bloggers and activists who were subjected to censorship. We will also replace the issue of internet censorship in the broader national context, and discuss various ways of fighting the illegal and unfair practices used by state-sanctioned authorities against internet users.
I. Online Censorship in Lebanon: Current Reality A. Cases and Statistics The Internet in Lebanon has, for a few years now, become a new target for censors who are increasingly abusing their power and exerting control over Lebanon’s internet users. Online freedom of expression cases are being referred by general prosecutors to Police bureaus (such as the Cybercrime and Intellectual Property Rights Bureau- hereafter referred to as the Cybercrimes Bureau) for investigation, who in turn are summoning regular internet users, bloggers and online journalist for questioning, sometimes using methods that do not respect basic human rights. The importance of such bureaus as well as the danger they pose today to both freedom of expression and Lebanese citizens in general will be discussed further in this report. Since 2010, 28 cases of summoning related to Internet censorship have been accounted for, where people were summoned by the Cybercrimes bureau for practicing their right to freedom of expression 2. On 13 March, prominent blogger and online journalist Imad Bazzi was interrogated by the Cybercrime Bureau after former Minister of State Panos Mangyan filed a slander lawsuit against him. In his complaint, Mangyan referred to a blog post Bazzi wrote last December in which he cited an abuse of power by the former minister. His case has been referred for prosecution. Bazzi is not the only blogger who has had to pay a visit to the Cyber Crimes Unit over strange complaints by the prosecutor’s office. Gino Raidy, another popular Lebanese blogger, was summoned for interrogation because he promoted “Skype, Viber and Yahoo applications, while bashing [social media platform] Cube 7”. Another blogger and activist, Rita Kamel, was summoned by the unit for exposing a possible fraud attempt by the organizers of the Pan Arab Web Award. Last year, feminist Abir Ghattas was pressured by [the ISF] Cyber Crimes Office to delete a blog post from her page about workers’ abuse in a Lebanese supermarket. A few weeks later, she was summoned for interrogation over the same topic because there was an official complaint about what she had written. In September 2013, journalist Rabih Farran was called in for questioning based on a complaint by famous fortune teller Laila Abdul-Latif over an article on al-Mukhtar news site, and was forced to sign a pledge not to criticize her again. Those are just samples of the numerous questioning and lawsuits filed against bloggers, activists, journalists and internet users across Lebanon. On top of this, the reason behind censorship is often absurd and does not justify bringing someone in for questioning for an accusation as benign as a page share on Facebook, like it was the case for Karim Hawa, who was questioned by the Cyber Crime Bureau in 2013. It is rather important to note that the cases reported by MARCH are those made public by the person in question or by someone related to him. We have reason to believe that numerous other cases go unreported and are not made public for fear of further prosecution.
2 MARCH. The Virtual Museum of Censorship, in http://www.censorshiplebanon.org/Categories/Internet
Below is a list of people summoned along with the censoring reason and action taken against them 3:
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Bassel Al Amine
Facebook
Arrested & detained
Political
Nabil Al Halabi
Facebook
Arrested & detained
Political
Ali Khalife
Facebook
Questioned
Political
Chebel Kassab
Facebook
Arrested
Political
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Blog
Questioned
Criticism
Zoulfikar Al Harake
Facebook
Questioned
Criticism
Michel Douwaihi
Facebook
Questioned & Detained
Criticised Gen. Security
Mohamad Nazal
Facebook
Questioned
Criticised judges
Khodor Salameh
Facebook
Questioned
Criticised Al-Nashra website
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Imad Bazzi
Blog
Questioned & Detained
Political
Gino Raidy
Blog
Questioned & Detained
Criticized Bonofa Comp.
Karim Hawa
Facebook
Questioned
-
Ali Itawi
Facebook
Questioned
Religion
Blog
Taken to court
Immoral
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Abir Ghatass
Blog
Questioned
Criticized CEO Spinneys
Rita Kamel
Blog
Questioned
Criticized Leila A. Latif
Lokman Slim
Blog
Questioned
-
Rasha Al Amin
Blog
Questioned
-
Mohamad El Haj Ali
Blog
Questioned & Detained
-
Imad Bazzi
Blog
Suspended
Political
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Twitter
Questioned & Detained
Political
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Facebook
Banned in Parliament
MEDIUM
ACTION
CENSORING REASON
Antoine Ramia
Facebook
Questioned & Detained
Political
Naim Hanna
Facebook
Questioned
Political
-
Questioned
Political
2016
2015 Tarek Chemaly
2014
Rita Kamel
2013
2012 Khodor Salameh
2011
2010
Khodor Salameh
3 MARCH. The Virtual Museum of Censorship, in http://www.censorshiplebanon.org/Categories/Internet
B. Banned Websites 4 Websites have also been subjected to censorship in Lebanon. In 2015, SMEX (Social Media Exchange) published a list of blocked websites in the different regions of Lebanon. The data gathered shows that websites face different kinds of censorship depending on the internet service provider and the social or political situation of the different regions of Lebanon. The reasons behind censoring, monitoring, banning or blocking websites in Lebanon can be divided into categories similar to those behind the restriction of online freedom of expression. Fifty websites belonging to six categories were reported as blocked: Poker Websites: Eight blocked websites under law 417 issued in 1995 which gives Casino Du Liban an exclusive right to invest in gambling. Escorting services: 23 websites blocked on the motive of “promoting prostitution” under articles 523 and 524 of penal code. Pornographic Sites: 5 pornographic websites blocked based on a previous reference by the general prosecutor who misjudged a case and blocked these websites. Israeli Websites: 11 Israeli websites blocked either from the source or following an order by the Lebanese general prosecutor, based on decree No.12562 issued on 19 of April 1963, following Boycott Israel Office attached with the Lebanese Economy Act. Breaching copyright: Two websites blocked following orders by the US government on the basis of copyright breach. LGBT: One website blocked due to being identified as a forum for lesbians in the Arab region.
II. The Issues of Online Censorship in Lebanon A. When did Online Censorship become such an issue in Lebanon? The censorship issues faced by Lebanon rest on three elements: the laws “framing” the practices are vague or non-existent; existing official censorship bodies are inadequate, and they routinely abuse their power. Besides, censorship in Lebanon is very arbitrary. It does not rest on solid grounds; even though the reason behind most of censorship cases is one of the reasons mentioned above, the censorship can be random. In some instances, the slightest criticism of the establishment will be censored, whereas in other instances controversial works will go unnoticed by the authorities. Most of the time, restrictions to freedom of expression online depend on who is offended, when and why. Online censorship is mostly dealt with by the infamous Cyber Crime Bureau. It was established in 2006 to provide the public prosecution with the necessary technical expertise to deal with internet-related crimes. The establishment of such a bureau is of course necessary to combat real online crimes (such as cyber-fraud, cyberterrorism, cyber-theft, child pornography etc.) but instead of focusing on these crimes, these bureaus are increasingly dealing with cases of freedom of expression. The issue here is that Lebanon’s public prosecution has become accustomed to referring any and all internet-related cases to such bureaus, including minor cases of defamation or libel. This means that bloggers, activists, and regular social media users are put in the same category as credit card fraudsters and those conducting terrorism-related activities online. The general lack of clarity relating to the power and scope of the bureau has exposed Lebanese Internet users to comprehensive criminal investigations over statements they have made online. Those accused have also been subject to unfair investigative procedures, in many cases amounting to bullying. For example, they have been regularly: (1) denied the right to know why they were being summoned for investigation; (2) barred from the presence of a lawyer during the preliminary investigation with them; (3) pressured into signing a document in which they commit to never again speak about a certain topic or person, as a condition for their release; (4) unjustly and deceptively lured into investigation and told lies about the reason behind their summon, only discovering the true motives afterwards; (5) often faced with non-specialized, unprofessional and incompetent officers who make incorrect technical assertions about the internet, showing a lack of knowledge of information-sharing online; (6) subject to having their activities monitored without proper justification and their right to privacy undermined; (7) arrested and kept for questioning for hours and even sometimes days. Gino Raidy described in detail how his interrogation took place at the end of January. He was called in for investigation without being allowed a lawyer and was told the reason for his interrogation only when he got to the ISF’s bureau. Moreover, after a discussion with the bureau chief, he was asked to sign a pledge. “The investigator tried to tell me that this is the easy way out, though [he] wasn’t as insistent and never threatened with jail or worse. I said I did nothing wrong, and that I won’t be bullied into admitting something I never did,” he explained. In six months (from March 2014 until September 2014), Lebanon’s Court of Publications has issued 40 court rulings against media outlets and journalists. Since 2006, Al-Akhbar has had more than 85 lawsuits, mostly related to slander, defamation, libel, and false news, filed against it.
4 SMEX. “Mapping blocked websites in Lebanon 2015”, March 26, 2015, in www.smex.org/mapping-blocked-websites-inlebanon-2015
B. Legislation The cases above show the core problem of censorship laws in Lebanon: a flagrant lack of clarity in censorship procedures and practices. Whereas freedom of expression is explicitly guaranteed in the Lebanese Constitution in Articles 85 and 136, online freedom of expression is nowhere to be mentioned. Therein lies the main problem. Lebanese jurisprudence has ruled that Internet shall be necessarily considered as a means of publication, given its availability and anonymous access. This means that all laws, procedures and punitive actions related to publications can be applied to each and every word you write and everything you publish on the Internet. It is therefore one of the means of publication through which slander and libel crimes may be committed. Hence, Internet users in Lebanon can be held accountable for practicing their freedom of expression online and held responsible in a penal law procedure. However, it is unfair to consider people accused of slander7 or libel8 as criminals, and to judge their acts as crimes. These acts should be considered a civil offense and should be investigated in a civil court as such. All freedom of expression cases should be dealt with a civic law suit. In terms of legislation, the ‘Cybercrime and Intellectual Property Rights Bureau’ was established by means of a Service Memorandum (number 204/609 dated March 8, 2006) without issuing a decree to amend the organizational structure of the Internal Security Forces (ISF). It is attached to the Special Criminal Investigations Department of the ISF's Judicial Police, which is concerned with state security crimes, terrorism, money laundering, and international larceny. In practice however, Public Prosecution offices refer all complaints related to internet related crimes to the Cybercrime Bureau, while granting it the right to carry out comprehensive criminal investigations. Therefore, the Cybercrime Bureau can summon any person for investigation at its offices, including individuals facing complaints over something they published on Twitter, Facebook, or in a blog. Its members are regular members of General Security and have not undergone any specific training with regards to art or social media.
Conclusion & Recommendations To counter the illegal and unfair practices of internet censorship in Lebanon, new legislation must be implemented. Firstly, the jurisdiction of the Cybercrimes bureau has to be clearly defined, as it was only created via an internal memo at the Internal Security Forces and is not based on existing Internet regulation legislation in Lebanon. MARCH will push for proper legislation that will legalize the Bureau and limit its prerogatives to cases of real cybercrime, cyber fraud, and cyber terrorism. The use of disproportionate punitive means must cease completely. Secondly, articles related to libel and slander must be removed from penal law. These acts should not be considered crimes, and those who commit them should not be considered criminals. Rather, they should be considered a civil offense and be investigated in a civil court along with all freedom of expression cases. March will lobby the government to include an amendment in the Publication law specifying that the internet is excluded from this law or push to modify the Publication law in its entirety and give Internet special status. Additionally, few lawyers are trained to handle cases related to online censorship. New and experienced lawyers should be trained on the matter and be made aware of the specificities that working on censorship cases entail. They should be provided with a background in art as well as be formed on social media use. Finally, mentalities need to change as expressing one’s opinion in a way that contradicts the opinion of others is still seen as a crime.
5 Article 8: “Individual liberty is guaranteed and protected by law. No one may be arrested, imprisoned, or kept in custody except according to the provisions of the law. No offense may be established or penalty imposed except by law”. 6 Article 13: “The freedom to express one’s opinion orally or in writing, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, and the freedom of association shall be guaranteed within the limits established by law”. 7 Article (385) of the Lebanese Penal Code has defined slander as “ascribing to a person, even in doubt, something offensive to his honor or dignity”. 8 Article (385) has defined libel as “any word, disrespect or insult and any expression or drawing indicating an offense shall be considered libel in the event it does not involve the ascription of a certain act”.
www.marchlebanon.org T. +961 1 208101