More than a quarter-century after leaving southern Lebanon following Israel’s withdrawal in 2000, thousands of Lebanese living in Israel have once again found themselves confronting a law that purports to address the country’s wartime divisions and legacy of conflict but does not grant many of them the amnesty they have sought.
At the same time, a dispute over Ahmed al-Asir and other Islamist detainees came close to derailing the compromise that paved the way for the law’s passage, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to MBN. Sunni lawmakers and political groups had pushed for the cases of some detainees to be addressed, while other factions opposed any amnesty that could extend to people convicted of killing Lebanese army personnel.
An estimated 4,000 people convicted, detained or wanted in connection with various cases could benefit from the law through the dropping of prosecutions or sentences, or reductions in those sentences. Other groups, however, remain excluded because of the nature of the offenses attributed to them and the exceptions contained in the legislation.
The law will not take effect immediately. It must first be referred to President Joseph Aoun for his signature and then be published in the official gazette. Sources told MBN that Aoun is expected to sign the law in its current form following the political compromise that allowed it to pass Parliament.
But opposition has already emerged in southern Lebanon.
Current residents of the town of Qlayaa, where many of the people who fled to Israel after the 2000 withdrawal had lived, issued a statement saying the law “in no way meets our aspirations, reflects the reality of our children’s case or addresses its essence.”
They called on the president to veto the bill in its current form, saying their children “are not in a position to ask for amnesty” and that their case is “a matter of justice and citizenship that cannot be divided up or subjected to political bargaining.”
The law does not grant a blanket amnesty to all Lebanese living in Israel.
It excludes crimes of treason, espionage and unlawful contact with Israel from its scope, while reopening the door to categories covered by a 2011 law concerning Lebanese who left for Israel.
That law allows civilians and family members who did not serve in a military or security capacity in the South Lebanon Army to return. Those who served in its military or security formations are subject to prosecution under Lebanese law upon their return.
The 2011 legislation established a framework for dealing with the issue, but its implementation remained limited. The matter returned to the political debate during consideration of the new amnesty law.
The legislation therefore distinguishes between Lebanese who left with their families during Israel’s withdrawal and those accused of acts that Lebanese law criminalizes as collaboration or espionage on behalf of Israel.
That distinction, however, has done little to satisfy some of those living in Israel.
A Lebanese man who left for Israel in 2000 told MBN that the law in its current form was “a disgrace to the Lebanese state,” saying it covered various categories of prisoners and detainees but did not explicitly address the status of former members of the South Lebanon Army.
Their demand, he said, is for “a clear amnesty that explicitly includes South Lebanon Army members.”
The army had about 2,500 members, he said, and many left with their families because of the fear and threats surrounding the withdrawal.
An estimated 4,000 to 4,500 Lebanese, including children and grandchildren of former fighters, now live in Israel. Most, he said, have no plans to return out of fear of imprisonment and Lebanon’s security and political conditions.
Contact with Lebanon is largely limited to relatives, he said, with no serious channels of communication with Lebanese political parties.
The South Lebanon Army was established during Lebanon’s civil war and was initially led by Saad Haddad and later by Antoine Lahd. With Israeli backing, it controlled parts of southern Lebanon in what became known as the security zone until Israel withdrew in 2000.
After the withdrawal, large numbers of SLA members and their families left for Israel, while others remained in Lebanon and faced prosecution on charges related to collaboration with Israel.
Lebanese living in Israel were not the only sticking point in the amnesty negotiations.
According to sources familiar with the talks, the cases of Islamist detainees, particularly Ahmed al-Asir and some people convicted or detained in cases linked to him, were among the issues that posed the greatest threat to the legislation.
Al-Asir emerged in the southern city of Sidon with a fiercely anti-Hezbollah message, opposing the group’s weapons and its involvement in the Syrian war alongside the government of Bashar al-Assad. The confrontation culminated in the Abra clashes in June 2013.
Fighting broke out on June 23 between al-Asir’s supporters and the Lebanese army and continued until the following day, when the army seized the compound where armed supporters of al-Asir had been holed up.
Eighteen soldiers were killed and about 100 others wounded in the fighting, along with a number of militants.
Al-Asir went into hiding after the clashes before being arrested at Beirut airport in August 2015 as he attempted to leave the country using a forged identity.
During debate over the amnesty law, Sunni political groups pushed for the cases of detainees they said had spent years in custody without final verdicts to be addressed. They also argued that some had faced trials shaped by the political climate surrounding the Syrian war and the deep divisions over Hezbollah’s military intervention there alongside the Assad government. The United States has long designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.
Other political factions and the families of soldiers killed in the fighting opposed any formula that could lead to amnesty for people convicted of killing army personnel or taking part in armed attacks against the military.
According to information obtained by MBN, the dispute over al-Asir and cases linked to him came close to blowing up the political compromise before the final text was reached.
At the same time, other political groups pushed for entirely different cases to be addressed, including those involving people wanted or convicted on drug-related charges, Lebanese living in Israel, and detainees and convicts in other security-related cases.
The convergence of these competing demands produced a formula that allowed the law to pass but left virtually every side with its own objections.
The timing of the law adds another dimension to the issue of Lebanese living in Israel. Lebanon and Israel are holding U.S.-mediated talks to address security arrangements in southern Lebanon, an Israeli withdrawal and the extension of Lebanese state authority, amid discussion of the possibility of eventually moving toward broader agreements on peace and security between the two countries.
The issue of Lebanese residents in Israel has not so far been publicly announced as part of those talks.
But if negotiations move beyond military and security arrangements toward a broader political understanding, the issue could emerge as one of the unresolved humanitarian and civilian questions between the two sides.
Adapted and translated from the original Arabic.
