The youth wing of the Free Patriotic Movement has distributed leaflets in Lebanese areas featuring the names of parliamentarians who voted for or supported the general amnesty law, calling renewed attention to the party's objections to the categories of criminals covered by the measure.
The leaflets carried photographs of the deputies alongside descriptions of each vote as a "crime": support for or a vote in favour of a general amnesty law that, according to the campaign, included hundreds of convicted criminals, among them people involved in killing soldiers and officers of the army and security forces.
The leaflets also displayed a circle containing the phrase "in blood", a symbolic reference to what the youth sector described as a signature written "in the blood of military martyrs", in a direct political message to the deputies who backed the law.
Parliament passed the general amnesty law on 12 August 2026 after introducing amendments to the version that emerged from joint committees. Among the main changes was a reduction in the time required to secure release for some detainees without convictions, from 14 years to 12 years of imprisonment.
The law passed in the absence of Free Patriotic Movement and Amal Resistance deputies after lawmakers from both blocs left the session. They had walked out over a disagreement concerning whether Defence Minister Michel Manse could deliver remarks on behalf of the military institution to the general assembly.
Joint parliamentary committees held a series of sessions in April and May to discuss the law, with broad participation from deputies and representatives of relevant bodies. On 19 May they approved the draft law in preparation for its referral to the general assembly.
Discussions centred on two conflicting demands: addressing severe prison overcrowding and ending cases of prolonged detention without conviction, versus preventing perpetrators of serious crimes and those involved in attacks on the military and security forces from benefiting from what many view as an amnesty that infringes the rights of victims and their families.
The committees introduced amendments to sentences and conditions for eligibility under the law, and stated during discussions that they had taken into account observations from the defence, interior and military authorities.
Opponents of the amnesty base their case primarily on victim rights, arguing that any solution to the prison crisis must clearly distinguish between detainees whose trials have been prolonged or who committed minor offences and infractions, and those convicted of murder or attacks on the army and security forces.
Supporters of the amnesty counter that the prison crisis has reached an unsustainable level, and that the law does not represent a blanket pardon for all prisoners but rather includes reductions, conditions and exemptions, alongside the need to address the problem of detainees who have spent years in custody without conviction.
