This is an updated translation of this article originally published in Arabic.
From the lack of basic office supplies and the deterioration in cleanliness standards, to shrinking salaries and frequent power cuts, the impact of Lebanon’s economic crisis on its judiciary is unmistakable. Already beset by political meddling and persistent corruption allegations, the court system confronts additional barriers to meaningful reform.
Since the economic and financial collapse in 2019 and through the COVID-19 pandemic, the judiciary has been steadily weakened. Its capacity for independent action has eroded so significantly that Lebanon’s rule of law ranking in the World Justice Project fell sharply since 2015 to reach the 108th place out of 142 in 2024.
The government under Prime Minister Nawaf Salam faces an uphill battle to fulfill its promise of combating corruption. Central to these efforts will be overhauling the judicial apparatus and boosting its effectiveness, alongside the passing of legislation to reinforce judicial independence.
To shed light on the realities confronting Lebanon’s courts and the repercussions of the economic crisis on justice and the rule of law, we spoke with Omar Taleb, lawyer and former Nonresident Fellow at TIMEP.
What is the single greatest effect of the economic crisis on Lebanon’s judiciary?
It goes without saying that an important pillar of judicial independence is for those who work in the judiciary system to receive adequate salaries, and to operate in dignified and well-equipped workplaces. This applies not only to judges but equally to lawyers, court clerks, bailiffs, and the courts’ entire logistical apparatus.
Lebanon’s financial meltdown has dealt a crippling blow to the judicial infrastructure. With prices soaring and the Lebanese pound’s depreciation, the real wages of judges and court staff have heavily decreased, triggering repeated strikes and bringing courts to a grinding halt, especially in 2022. Simultaneously, chronic underfunding caused essential supplies to not always be available in courtrooms. Even before the economic downturn, the judiciary was obstructed by political meddling; the economic collapse has only deepened that dysfunction.
Even before the economic downturn, the judiciary was obstructed by political meddling; the economic collapse has only deepened that dysfunction
The first signs of this appeared in May 2019, when judges challenged a government decision and struck over cuts to their pay and benefits. A few months later, the October 17 revolution further disrupted access to courthouses, as mass protests and blocked roads made it near-impossible to convene sessions, especially during the protests’ first weeks.
These successive shocks—strikes, street blockades, forced closures—complicated courts’ work. People who needed to go to court grew accustomed to delays, whether caused by labor action or pandemic restrictions, and year after year the backlog of delayed court cases increased.
Meanwhile, judges face heavy caseloads and hard working conditions. I personally know one judge who presides over two separate district courts, and handles civil disputes, criminal trials, urgent motions, and enforcement matters, all by himself.
As a lawyer, how has your daily work at the courts been affected?
Anyone involved in the justice system knows that the lack of stability has become the system’s defining feature in recent years. Judges and court clerks have mounted successive strikes, at times involving some 400 judges, roughly 80 percent of the bench. At one point, there were so many strikes that, as soon as one would end, another would start, leaving lawyers and litigants asking: “Are the courts even open today?”
Even when there weren’t any strikes, courthouse life was anything but normal. Over the past five years—especially between 2021 and 2022, the economic and social crisis pushed our justice institutions to the brink of collapse. On any morning when I had a critical hearing or filing, my day would begin with a phone call to a court official or fellow lawyer: “Is there power at the Palace of Justice?” The answer would determine whether a detainee would have his day in court, whether a labor plaintiff could proceed, or whether any paperwork would be accepted at all.
In Tripoli’s Palace of Justice, blackouts crippled the elevator serving all five floors. In some court offices, there are no windows, which forced staff and lawyers to use their mobile phones’ lights in order to see anything. These electricity shortages peaked in 2022, and began to gradually improve after 2023.
At the same time, basic supplies—paper, pens, case-register books, official notice forms stamped by the Ministry of Justice—could no longer always be found. Courts responded at the time in an ad hoc manner: judges, clerks, and lawyers gathered personal funds to purchase stationery, and some courts relied on sporadic donations from organizations. Cleaning crews were no longer around when the state failed to pay their salaries, forcing court personnel to hire private cleaners themselves.
Court employees sometimes had to take on second jobs just to feed their families
Court employees sometimes had to take on second jobs just to feed their families. I know one clerk who comes in only once a week and goes to his other job the rest of the week. On that single day, his tiny office gets packed with lawyers rushing to file urgent motions. “I won’t take bribes,” he told me, “so I have no choice but to work elsewhere to provide for my children and pay the electricity generator bill.”
In 2024, logistical conditions slowly started improving, but did not completely stabilize or return to their pre-crisis pace. We have moved from near-constant shutdowns and strikes to bare, minimal operations, with modest raises for court aides.
Compounding these challenges, the last comprehensive round of judicial appointments dates back to 2017. Nearly eight years on, retirements have hollowed out many benches with no replacements. For example, when the presiding judge of the Real Estate Chamber in the Court of First Instance retired in mid-2024, that entire division simply went dark; no trials scheduled until new appointments are made. With the election of a president in early 2025 and the subsequent formation of a new government, we hope that the appointment process will resume, vacancies will be filled, and stalled courts will be reactivated—paving the way to restore some measure of stability to our justice system.
How were the rule of law and judicial integrity impacted by the economic crisis?
Courts’ activity has generally declined since the economic crisis, with fewer cases filed and rulings issued. For example, in 2019, a judge at the criminal court in Damour, south of Beirut, handled 1,014 cases and issued rulings in 467. Those figures dropped to just 202 filings and 115 judgments in 2021. Likewise, the Baabda Labor Arbitration Council, responsible for labor disputes, saw its caseload fall from 1,689 new claims and 762 decided cases in 2019 to only 255 filings and 283 judgments in 2022. And while more recent data is not available, there is little evidence to indicate that these figures have seen much improvement.
Moreover, corruption within the courts—such as bribery and outside interference—has become part of the daily routine. Such misconduct already existed before the crisis, but the economic collapse made this issue even more visible and spread out. Fewer people are turning to the courts, an unmistakable indicator of waning public confidence. Many have endured bitter experiences in court, and high‐profile cases such as the Beirut Port explosion investigation—marred by political meddling and delays—have cemented the perception that our judiciary is ineffective.
Consequently, citizens increasingly resort to alternative authorities—sectarian, political, or clan leaders—to resolve disputes. This shift not only undermines state institutions and reinforces those factions’ power, but it also deepens Lebanon’s broader crisis.
How has judicial independence been affected by the economic crisis? And what forms has political interference in the judiciary taken recently?
Structural obstacles to genuine judicial independence in Lebanon predate the current economic crisis, yet the material and moral collapse of the judiciary’s foundations has only rendered an already fragile system more precarious. When the economic crisis was at its worst, some judges, driven by hard financial circumstances, filed for extended leaves in order to seek jobs outside Lebanon and earn salaries that enable them to afford a basic standard of living.
Legislative reform is needed to achieve true independence of the judiciary from the executive branch. Under the current Judicial Code, the most sensitive senior posts are appointed by political authorities. The Supreme Judicial Council itself comprises 10 members, eight appointed by the executive and only two elected by the wider bench.
Successive governments have exploited this power to install compliant judges […] and to stall politically sensitive cases
Moreover, all judicial assignments and transfers are controlled by the Council of Ministers. Successive governments have exploited this power to install compliant judges—especially in pivotal roles such as the Public Prosecution and investigative magistracies—and to stall politically sensitive cases, notably the Beirut Port explosion case. Most recently, the prosecution of the fuel tank explosion in Tleil, in the northern region of Akkar, was halted after the presiding investigating judge, Jamal al-Hajjar, was appointed as Deputy Public Prosecutor, leaving his position in the case vacant till today.
After the new government was formed in early 2025, Investigating Judge Tarek Bitar has resumed inquiries into the Beirut Port explosion, renewing hopes that the investigation would move forward. The government approved a draft law designed to bolster judicial autonomy and sent it to parliament, but the parliamentary Administration and Justice Committee did not consider the draft, and instead asked for the Justice Ministry’s comments on an earlier draft law the committee had completed in 2023, rather than presenting an entirely new draft law.
Thus, the debate over judicial independence has been caught in a new loop of delay, deferring what ought to be a national priority reform.
How do you see the future of reform in Lebanon in light of the judicial crisis?
The state of the judiciary is the clearest barometer of whether a functioning state truly exists, as it embodies order, stability, social security, and the protection of human rights.
When court clerks go on strike or cannot afford to pay for transport, their frustration is justified. When litigants do not see clerks or judges appear in court, they too are justified to direct their anger toward the system. When judges protest against their degrading work conditions, they too have every right to be angry, even if the critical nature of their job demands continuous service.
Yet if we take a step back and look at the bigger picture, there is no doubt that the primary culprit in this catastrophe is the political system engineered by sectarian leaders who have trampled the judiciary and every public institution.
The scene may appear bleak, but there is the faintest glimmer of hope. There are still judges who fulfill, and even exceed, their duties, fighting through impossible odds. What we need now is to amplify these voices, rally around them, and place them at the forefront of the national agenda. May it be soon…
Omar Taleb is a former Nonresident Fellow at TIMEP focusing on impunity and access to justice in Lebanon.