{"id":16580,"date":"2026-09-28T15:53:42","date_gmt":"2026-09-28T15:53:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/achrights.org\/?p=16580"},"modified":"2026-09-28T16:04:18","modified_gmt":"2026-09-28T16:04:18","slug":"syrians-in-lebanese-prisons-unending-suffering","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/achrights.fr\/en\/2026\/09\/28\/16580\/","title":{"rendered":"Syrians in Lebanese Prisons: Unending Suffering"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n

A report discussing the violations inflicted on Syrian refugees held on remand, in detention and in Lebanese prisons during unfair trial proceedings<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Executive Summary<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n

This report is issued by  Access Center for Human Rights (ACHR). It appears at this particular time in order to document, in light of the Lebanese Parliament\u2019s adoption of the General Amnesty Law (Law No. 70\/2026) in August 2026, the violations that were being committed against Syrian refugees who were held on remand, in detention or in Lebanese prisons during the years preceding that decision, whether in the context of unfair trial proceedings or during periods of temporary detention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, on 10 September 2026 the Lebanese Constitutional Council issued Decision No. 10\/2026, suspending the effect of Law No. 70\/2026 pending a ruling on the challenge brought against it. This means that the implementation of the amnesty provisions is suspended and that, for the time being, those who would benefit from it are neither being released nor having their sentences reduced. In light of this development, this paper takes on twofold importance: on the one hand, it documents the conditions and practices that detainees experienced throughout the period preceding the adoption of the amnesty law; on the other, it keeps this file present and urgent in view of the current state of legal uncertainty in which detainees find themselves, who have so far not benefited from any actual release or reduction of their sentences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The paper shows that Syrian refugees in Lebanon were subjected, during this period, to arbitrary arrest and torture by the security agencies, particularly in the aftermath of the events in Arsal in August 2014, when the frequency of these violations clearly escalated and continued throughout the following years through security pursuit and arbitrary arrests, some of which were based on charges that were not proven in accordance with due legal process. In some cases, these violations affected refugee minors who were tortured and subsequently tried on charges that included terrorism or membership of armed groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This paper documents the harsh conditions prevailing in places of detention, the methods of investigation and interrogation used, and the outcomes of unfair trials that were not based on conclusive evidence, in addition to the deprivation of detainees of their basic rights inside places of detention and pre-trial detention, such as the right to appoint a lawyer or to seek legal advice at their own expense, the right to contact their families, and the right to obtain medical care.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The importance of this paper also lies in the fact that it follows up on what the Center has previously documented in earlier reports on human rights violations against Syrian refugees, as torture, ill-treatment and methods of arbitrary arrest and detention have remained among the most prominent issues that the Center has monitored and followed over the years, up to the present stage, in which Lebanon is witnessing a legislative and constitutional debate over the fate of the amnesty law itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although Lebanon has received large numbers of Syrian refugees, the procedures and policies adopted by the Lebanese authorities in dealing with the Syrian asylum file throughout that period fell short of the level required to ensure their protection, safety and dignity. Since the start of the waves of displacement into Lebanon, the security agencies and the Lebanese state have not shouldered their responsibilities in a manner consistent with their obligations under domestic laws and international conventions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most Syrian refugee detainees were denied the right to appoint a lawyer during the investigation proceedings, which restricted their ability to defend themselves or to challenge their detention. In addition, they waited for prolonged periods before appearing before the investigating judge, without any legal justification, even though in the eyes of the law they remained innocent. This constituted a flagrant violation of fair trial standards, which this paper seeks to document as part of the record on which any subsequent path to accountability or reform should be built, regardless of the ultimate legal fate of the amnesty law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Lebanese authorities were also required to take into account the health conditions of refugees held on remand, in detention or in prison inside detention and pre-trial detention centres, since placing them in unclean environments lacking proper sanitary conditions was unacceptable. This paper documents these conditions as part of the reality that preceded the adoption of the amnesty law, and which remains in place for most detainees given the suspension of the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In light of the foregoing, the paper considers that the General Amnesty Law, although it carries the possibility of achieving a humanitarian gain for a number of detainees, remains, as of the date of publication of this paper, suspended by a decision of the Constitutional Council, which leaves the reality of detainees as it was before the law\u2019s adoption. Regardless of the outcome of the challenge before the Constitutional Council, the Lebanese authorities remain obliged to respect the domestic and international laws that bind them, to curb arbitrary arrest procedures against Syrian refugees, to ensure their protection and safeguard their dignity, to stop the practices of torture and all other forms of ill-treatment, and not to be lax in holding the perpetrators of torture crimes to account in accordance with the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We propose that the European Union, supporting states and donors, in view of the legal uncertainty surrounding the amnesty file, establish an independent oversight mechanism to assess the Lebanese authorities\u2019 response in addressing the legacy of violations of arbitrary arrest and torture against Syrian refugees, including following the course and outcome of the constitutional challenge, and ensuring that the state of legal suspension is not used as a pretext for postponing any actual reform. We stress the need for the European Union and supporting states to back advocacy and pressure efforts on Lebanon to comply with the International Bill of Human Rights, and to involve civil society organisations in monitoring processes. We also recommend strengthening the role of supporting states in monitoring Lebanon\u2019s violations of international conventions and treaties, and intensifying effective engagement with the relevant civil society organisations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research Methodology<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Access Center for Human Rights (ACHR) begins the documentation phase by having the team members provide their personal details in order to gain the victims\u2019 trust, to identify the intermediary contacts who helped facilitate communication, and to introduce the Center, its way of working and its scope. The documentation process set out in this paper covers cases that occurred during the period preceding the adoption of the General Amnesty Law (Law No. 70\/2026) in August 2026, making it a record that documents the reality of detainees before that decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This documentation takes on additional importance now that the Lebanese Constitutional Council, on 10 September 2026, issued a decision suspending the effect of Law No. 70\/2026 pending a ruling on the challenge brought against it, which means that the reality of detainees documented in this paper remains the situation actually in place as of the date of preparation of this paper. The record remains usable at a later stage in following up the outcome of the constitutional challenge and the situation of those who may benefit from the amnesty if it is ultimately adopted, or of those who may not be covered by it. The team also takes care to stress its commitment to the working principles set out in the internal work policies, including the confidentiality of information, the retention of data, and obtaining the victim\u2019s prior consent to the disclosure of information.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The scope of communication, whether in person or through secure encrypted and\/or open-source means of communication, is determined according to the likelihood of the team, the victims and\/or their families being exposed to security risks, and according to whether the information can be shared by voice call. In most cases the team makes contact through one of the secure means of communication to obtain initial information, in preparation for conducting the interview and building a direct communication relationship with the victims or their families.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In all interviews, the team is committed to using secure means of communication to preserve the safety and privacy of victims, undertaking not to publish personal data without direct authorisation, maintaining the confidentiality of information lists, protecting the confidentiality of sources, whether these are personal data or material or physical evidence, and adhering to safety standards for the storage and archiving of information on secure servers to which access is restricted to specific individuals within the Center\u2019s team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The interviews rely on a standardised list of questions contained in questionnaires prepared in advance by the team on the basis of international documentation mechanisms and the United Nations form approved for recording and reporting violations, in the interviewees\u2019 original language and without any material or non-material consideration. A forensic doctor is engaged in some cases to document the conditions of victims who suffered serious psychological and\/or physical violations, either at the direct request of the victims themselves or based on the team\u2019s assessment of the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In all monitoring, documentation and review operations, the team takes special precautions to assess and rank the monitored and documented information in terms of its credibility and accuracy, by verifying: the primary and secondary sources of information, the level of precise detail, the existence of contradictions, the presence or absence of elements that support or refute the violation, the date on which it occurred and\/or was recorded, and the party responsible for it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In documentation operations the Center relies on the definitions of violations adopted by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and its standards, which include \u201caccuracy\u201d, \u201cobjectivity\u201d and \u201cimpartiality\u201d, as fundamental pillars of documentation and of the preparation of research papers and reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The monitoring and documentation process faces numerous challenges in the Lebanese context, notably the security risks to which human rights workers are exposed. It should therefore be noted that all of the team\u2019s efforts to monitor and document violations reflect only the statistical values of what it was possible to reach during the period preceding the adoption of the amnesty law, and remain unable to encompass all violations through scientifically representative random samples. Nevertheless, they contribute to clarifying the general patterns that prevailed in that period, and to drawing attention to the scale of the systematic violations inflicted on refugees during it, amid accumulated security and economic constraints, thereby providing a necessary background for understanding the context in which the amnesty law was issued, and for following the consequences of the suspension of its operation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n

With the outbreak of the Syrian revolution in 2011 and the transformation of peaceful protests into armed conflict, large numbers of Syrian refugees were displaced to Lebanon, by virtue of geography, fleeing the killing and destruction that ravaged their regions, their livelihoods, their property and their lives for nearly thirteen years. During that time Lebanon hosted nearly two million displaced people at the peak of the waves of displacement. Because the government authorities did not formally organise the waves of displacement, no precise figures were available for the number of these displaced people; estimates, however, indicated that the number of Syrian refugees in Lebanon reached about 1.8 million people, of whom around 880,000 were registered with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, according to 2025 statistics, and the numbers have begun to decline annually.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Syrian displacement crisis in Lebanon coincided with severe economic repercussions, manifested in the economic collapse Lebanon experienced in 2019, described as one of the worst in the world, followed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and then the Beirut Port explosion on 4 August 2020. These events were accompanied by security tensions in some Lebanese regions that in some respects took on a sectarian character, as a result of Lebanon\u2019s natural exposure to the nature of the events unfolding in Syria. All of this weakened the state administratively, in terms of security, and economically, and also contributed to the growth of hate speech between the components of the Lebanese people and the displaced community, which rose or subsided depending on the atmosphere sweeping over the two countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amid these deteriorating conditions sweeping the region, which continue, albeit in a different form represented by the war on Gaza, Lebanon was unable to control the internal security situation. This resulted in the spread of crime in multiple forms, from theft and killings through to terrorist acts. All of this was accompanied by the absence of a clear vision on the part of the Lebanese state on how to organise the waves of displacement, and the absence of any real mechanism for granting these displaced people legal residency guaranteeing them a dignified and safe stay in Lebanon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amid this security, economic and social reality on the one hand, and the weakness of the state and its institutions on the other, Lebanese prisons were not immune to the general crisis afflicting the country. The Access Center for Human Rights, along with other local and international human rights organisations, has documented serious abuses in this regard: arbitrary arrests and detentions affecting Syrian refugees in the various Lebanese regions were documented, carried out through security campaigns and raids on displacement centres, and at times going as far as pursuing them at their workplaces or detaining them on the roads.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Acts of torture and humiliation against refugees were also documented, the frequency of which rises from time to time, and which at times went as far as killing and causing permanent disabilities. These events were accompanied by serious violations of the right to a fair trial: in addition to arbitrary arrest and degrading treatment, refugee detainees were deprived of rights guaranteed to them by international and domestic laws, such as the right to appoint a lawyer upon arrest, to contact their families, and even to know the charge brought against them. These violations continued to pursue refugees even after they entered prison, where wretched conditions were documented in Lebanese prisons in terms of severe overcrowding, sanitation and weak medical follow-up. In the broad sense adopted in this report, prisons include places of temporary detention and holding cells in which, by judicial decision, the liberty of accused persons or persons complained against who are still under investigation or trial is restricted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All of this takes place despite the existence of a Lebanese legal system that expressly prohibits such abuses, starting from the Constitution and passing through the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, and including Law No. 65\/2017, which criminalises torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in addition to guidance documents and codes of conduct relating to the military and security corps: the Army, the Internal Security Forces, General Security and State Security. A number of international conventions, both binding and non-binding, also require Lebanon to adopt a completely different approach in dealing with the Syrian refugee who fled the ravages of armed conflict to Lebanon and for whom no ground for voluntary return has been secured after the fall of the Syrian regime, rather than treating him or her in a manner that may at times be harsher than what he or she would have faced had he or she remained in Syria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amid this accumulated reality, the Lebanese Parliament adopted the General Amnesty Law (Law No. 70\/2026) in August 2026, which at first glance appeared a glimmer of hope for a number of Syrian refugees held on remand, in detention or in prison. However, on 10 September 2026 the Lebanese Constitutional Council issued a decision suspending the effect of this law pending a ruling on the challenge brought against it, which has left the situation of these detainees in limbo, with no release or actual reduction of sentences as of the date of preparation of this paper. It is precisely this development that has prompted the Access Center for Human Rights to issue this research paper at this time, with the aim of documenting the reality that Syrian refugees lived inside Lebanese places of detention and prisons throughout the period preceding the issuance of the amnesty law, and which remains the reality in force in practice while the law is suspended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This research paper focuses specifically on the situation of Syrian refugees inside Lebanese prisons, given the essential role that prisons should play in every country in the world in reform and rehabilitation. The paper addresses the refugee\u2019s path from being pursued by the security agencies, through the period of detention and trial, up to documenting the period of stay inside Lebanese prisons, and the extent to which this course accords with the relevant domestic and international laws. The paper concludes by addressing the Judicial Cooperation Agreement between Lebanon and Syria, and the role expected of it, together with the fate of the General Amnesty Law once the challenge before the Constitutional Council is decided, in alleviating the suffering of the Syrian refugee inside Lebanese prisons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First: The Arbitrary Deprivation of Liberty of Syrian Refugees<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n

Under international law, deprivation of liberty is arbitrary if it occurs in one of the following cases:[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Where the deprivation of liberty cannot be justified on any legal basis, such as keeping a person in detention after the end of his or her sentence.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Where the deprivation of liberty results from the exercise of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by international laws and norms, such as the right to choose one\u2019s religion and belief or to express an opinion.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Where there is total or partial non-compliance with the international rules relating to a fair trial, such as those set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the relevant international instruments accepted by the State concerned, for example the duty to inform the detainee of the reasons for his or her arrest, to bring him or her promptly before the judiciary, and to guarantee the right to challenge the lawfulness of his or her detention or arrest.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Where asylum seekers or migrants are subjected to prolonged administrative detention without the possibility of administrative or judicial review or appeal.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. Where the deprivation of liberty is based on discrimination on grounds of birth, national origin, language, religion, economic or social status, political opinion, sex or any other status, such that it ultimately aims at, or leads to, the negation of equality in human rights.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    As for Lebanese law, we note its full consistency with international law in terms of prohibiting any form of arbitrary deprivation of liberty, given that Lebanon is a founding member of the United Nations and contributed to drafting the most prominent instruments that govern its work, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and it is therefore a signatory to and has acceded to these treaties and legislation and is bound by them, as stipulated in the Lebanese Constitution.[2]<\/sup><\/a> For this reason we see that Lebanese laws as a whole seek to respect the rights of detainees, remand detainees and prisoners; for example, and not exhaustively, during the period of custody before the judicial police, the period of detention may not generally exceed 48 hours,[3]<\/sup><\/a> and any breach of this principle exposes the person responsible to criminal penalties.[4]<\/sup><\/a> This embodies the principle of \u201cno punishment without a legal provision\u201d: since the deprivation of any person\u2019s liberty is a form of punishment, imposing this punishment without an express provision permitting it violates Article 8 of the Lebanese Constitution and, by extension, the Lebanese domestic laws.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    However, the existence of legal provisions does not necessarily mean that they are applied to the letter. According to what the Access Center for Human Rights has documented, arbitrary arrest is one of the most prominent violations to which Syrian refugees in Lebanon are subjected: in 2023 the Center monitored  1,080 cases, and in 2025 it monitored 1,353 cases, distributed between individual and collective arrests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Several organisations, including Amnesty International, also monitored in previous years numerous arrests carried out by the Lebanese state, represented by its security and judicial agencies, which were described as arbitrary, as many refugees were arrested without being informed of the charges against them, which constitutes a flagrant violation of both international law and Lebanese law, as we have set out above. Furthermore, many cases were monitored in which detainees were denied contact with their families or even the appointment of a lawyer, which amounts to a deprivation of their most basic rights and undoubtedly embodies the arbitrary nature of their detention.[5]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Center also documented cases in which detainees among the Syrian refugees stated that the main reason for their arrest was their opposition to the regime of Bashar al-Assad, with the investigators focusing in their interrogations on ascertaining their political orientation. This is confirmed by organisations including the Syrian Network for Human Rights, and it is clear evidence that the arrest was based on political opinion.[6]<\/sup><\/a> Nor did Syrian refugee women escape arbitrary arrest; Amnesty International monitored cases in which some women were arrested solely in order to pressure their husbands into confessing, an additional glaring breach that goes to the lawfulness of the arrest or detention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    According to the latest statistics of the Directorate of Prisons at the Ministry of Justice, the number of prisoners in Lebanese prisons in February 2026 stood at about 6,498 persons, of whom 83% were held on remand without trial. This enormous figure for the number of persons held without trial, if it indicates anything, indicates the scale of the suffering and injustice to which prisoners are subjected, including of course prisoners of Syrian nationality, who constitute the highest proportion among foreigners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Second: Torture and Degrading Treatment<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n

    The prohibition of torture and ill-treatment is embodied in many international charters, treaties and conventions ratified by Lebanon,[7]<\/sup><\/a> as well as in its domestic laws. Accordingly, the Lebanese authorities are bound under the Constitution, domestic laws and the relevant international treaties to refrain from resorting to torture against any person. In addition to international treaties and domestic laws, torture is absolutely prohibited under the peremptory rules of international law known as \u201cJus Cogens\u201d, and therefore no state may derogate from it on the pretext of war, emergency or counter-terrorism. As torture is a peremptory norm of customary international law, the principle prohibiting it applies to all states regardless of whether they have ratified particular conventions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Nevertheless, judicial police personnel in many countries resort to torture, either systematically as a matter of state policy or on an individual basis, which constitutes a flagrant violation of international laws and norms and at times even of domestic laws. This is what the Access Center for Human Rights has monitored, in addition to the confirmations of several human rights organisations working in Lebanon, with regard to prisoners, persons held on remand and detainees, among them Syrian refugees fleeing the ravages of war and persecution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Syrian refugees in detention centres belonging to the security branches are subjected to degrading treatment and all kinds of torture, in order to extract confessions from them centred on admitting membership of terrorist groups or providing information, on the basis of flimsy presumptions. The Center has monitored numerous cases in which the refugee either lacked identity documents or was a defector from the Syrian government army, and was arrested and tortured in order to extract statements in which he would admit to terrorism charges, merely because he lacked such documents. This is only to be expected given the events in Syria, as many refugees were forced to flee suddenly and could not take their documents with them, or lost them during their journey of displacement, or the documents were lost as a result of the destruction of their homes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The same applies to soldiers and officers who deserted the army and took refuge in other countries such as Lebanon so as not to be implicated in bloodshed, which is a right guaranteed to them. But instead of receiving protection in Lebanon, they were arrested and tortured on charges of belonging to terrorist organisations, as defection from the Syrian army was considered, on its own, a presumption of belonging to armed groups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Some detainees reported that they were tied to boards or suspended with their hands cuffed behind their backs for hours on end, and many suffered such severe beatings that they lost consciousness or had their teeth broken. Among the cases monitored by the Center, which numbered about 73 in 2020 alone, is the story of a refugee who had defected from the Syrian army. He was arrested at a Lebanese intelligence checkpoint in the town of Labweh while trying to cross to Beirut without personal documents; he was detained and held there for two days before being transferred to the Ablah branch to complete the investigation. He remained there for seven days, during which he was beaten and tortured to extract information from him, and the marks of torture remain visible on his body more than seven years after this violation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    After the investigation ended, he was forced to choose a terrorism charge from among several to attribute to himself, and he signed the investigation record although all of his confessions had been extracted under torture. He was then transferred to the Lebanese Ministry of Defence, where he stayed nine days under investigation, during which he was taken to interrogation rooms and beaten on various parts of his body, and at times lost consciousness, hearing and sight for hours without being brought before a doctor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    After the coerced confession, he was transferred to the Military Court, where he was held in the holding cell for fifteen days, and was then brought before the court, which read out his confessions to him without any fair guarantees or adherence to the rules of judicial integrity. He was sentenced to one year in prison, which he served in Roumieh Prison, together with a fine, which the victim\u2019s lawyer paid at the end of the term, whereupon he was released.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In another incident, a Lebanese army patrol raided a camp in the town of Marj on 13 August 2018, arrested three refugees and took them to the General Intelligence centre in Ablah, where they were severely beaten. Children did not escape torture and degrading treatment either: Amnesty International documented the arrest of four children in late 2014 who were severely beaten and subjected to degrading treatment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In addition, Human Rights Watch documented 355 cases, its report proving the existence of torture practices against these children: some were subjected to electric shocks, others were hung by ropes and had cold water poured over their bodies, and this coincided with their being denied contact with their families.[8]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Center also documented cases in the Bekaa region in 2021, where three children aged between 10 and 13 were held by the municipal police and interrogated in a shameful manner accompanied by insults and beatings. Their families were unable to file any complaint because they were threatened with deportation owing to the expiry of their residency permits, and they were thus deprived of recourse to the judiciary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Inhuman treatment is of course not limited to physical torture, as insults and verbal humiliation accompany detainees throughout the period of their detention. This was confirmed by one minor to the Center\u2019s team while he was held at an Internal Security Forces police station in Baalbek, when he was no older than 16.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Accordingly, this degrading treatment to which Syrian refugee minors are subjected inside detention and arrest centres constitutes, in addition to breaching Lebanese domestic laws, a flagrant breach of the international obligations Lebanon has signed up to, foremost the Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly with regard to the duty to refrain from subjecting a child to torture, not to deprive a child of his or her liberty arbitrarily, to separate the child from adults during detention, and to provide legal assistance as quickly as possible.[9]<\/sup><\/a> This is also confirmed by the Law on the Protection of Juveniles in domestic Lebanese law, which is distinguished by mitigated procedures and provisions of a reformative character.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Third: The Health Conditions of Prisoners<\/strong><\/a><\/strong><\/h1>\n\n\n\n

    The Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, known as the \u201cNelson Mandela Rules\u201d,[10]<\/sup><\/a>provide that all prisoners have the right to dignified and humane conditions of confinement. The State bears fundamental responsibility for ensuring the required health standards by providing food, clean water, heating, lighting, ventilation, clothing, bedding and sanitary facilities in proper condition, and the prison administration and the authorities concerned must verify this periodically. In addition, prisoners must undergo periodic medical examinations carried out by a qualified doctor to ensure everyone\u2019s safety, with immediate intervention to examine the sick and provide them with appropriate treatment when needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    However, according to the 2025 annual report of the National Human Rights Commission, which includes the Committee for the Prevention of Torture, which was based on the field visits the Committee conducted to prisons, detention centres and holding cells in the various Lebanese regions, in addition to studying detainees\u2019 files and monitoring their conditions, it emerged that places of detention continue to suffer from serious structural deficiencies that leave them far from compliance with the relevant international standards and national laws.[11]<\/sup><\/a> The report concluded that detention conditions continue to deteriorate, with some problems aggravated by overcrowding, economic conditions and the Israeli war on Lebanon. The most prominent observations are as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n