Why the repeal of Article 522 remains incomplete

For years, Article 522 of Lebanon’s Penal Code symbolized one of the country’s most controversial legal provisions concerning women’s rights. The article allowed perpetrators of rape and certain other sexual crimes to avoid prosecution or suspend their punishment if they married their victims.

Long criticized by women’s rights organizations as a law that rewarded offenders while punishing survivors, the provision became the focus of years of advocacy led by civil society organizations (CSOs), most notably KAFA (enough) Violence and Exploitation. Although being repealed in 2017, Lawyer Fatima El Hajj of KAFA, who spoke to The Beiruter, asserted that the reform did not fully eliminate the legal mechanisms that allow perpetrators in certain circumstances to evade punishment, leaving significant loopholes and prompting continued calls for broader legislative reform.

Before 2017: A law that protected perpetrators instead of victims

According to Lawyer Fatima El Hajj, Article 522 was the final provision in the chapter of the Lebanese Penal Code dealing with rape and sexual assault. Its effect was straightforward yet deeply controversial: if the perpetrator entered into a valid marriage with the victim, criminal proceedings would be halted or the execution of an imposed sentence suspended. From KAFA’s perspective, the law effectively rewarded the offender while denying justice to the survivor.

El Hajj argued that rather than recognizing rape as a serious criminal offense deserving punishment, the legislation provided offenders with a legal escape route. Instead of holding perpetrators accountable, the law enabled them to transform the crime into a marriage, forcing victims to continue living with the very individuals who had assaulted them.

She described the consequences as extending far beyond the initial assault. In her view, compelling a survivor to marry her attacker subjected her to continuous abuse under the legal protection of marriage. Rather than restoring justice, the law institutionalized impunity while placing the burden of preserving family honor and social reputation on the victim instead of the perpetrator.

We were punishing the victim and rewarding the perpetrator.

For years, women’s rights organizations maintained that Article 522 reflected outdated social attitudes that prioritized family reputation over survivors' rights, reinforcing stigma while shielding offenders from accountability.

The 2017 repeal: A major victory with important reservations

After years of advocacy campaigns, public demonstrations, and legal mobilization by civil society organizations, the Lebanese Parliament officially repealed Article 522 of the Penal Code on 16 August 2017, thus ending the provision that had allowed perpetrators of rape and several related offenses to avoid punishment by marrying their victims.

The decision followed years of sustained advocacy by women’s rights organizations and marked a significant turning point in Lebanon’s legal treatment of sexual violence. However, Parliament did not simultaneously remove the exemptions contained in Articles 505 and 518, leading organizations such as KAFA to describe the reform as an important but incomplete legislative achievement.

El Hajj considered the repeal an important achievement and a significant gain for women’s rights in Lebanon. Nevertheless, she highlighted that the reform remained incomplete. The original Article 522 had applied broadly to offenses covered within the Penal Code chapter on sexual assault and rape. Although Parliament abolished the article itself, it simultaneously amended other provisions within the same chapter rather than eliminating every avenue through which marriage could affect criminal liability.

As a result, KAFA welcomed the repeal as an important symbolic and legal victory but argued that it failed to remove all of Article 522’s practical effects.

The remaining legal loopholes that render the reform incomplete

According to El Hajj, the principal concern lies in Articles 505 and 518 of the Penal Code.

She explains that Article 505 continues to allow an offender who has sexual relations with a minor between the ages of 15 and 18 under circumstances specified by the law to benefit from marriage to the victim, subject to judicial oversight and social worker supervision. While the amendment introduced procedural safeguards intended to verify that the marriage is genuine rather than a means of escaping prosecution, KAFA argued that the underlying exemption remains fundamentally problematic.

For El Hajj, this provision creates two serious consequences.

First, it effectively recognizes child marriage within a civil law enacted by Parliament. She noted that Lebanon’s Code of Obligations and Contracts considers full legal capacity to begin at the age of 18. In her view, allowing marriage below that age through the Penal Code contradicts this principle and reinforces child marriage instead of limiting it.

Second, the provision continues to offer offenders an opportunity to avoid criminal accountability through marriage. Rather than fully dismantling the logic of Article 522, El Hajj believed that Parliament preserved part of its effect by maintaining exceptions involving minors.

Furthermore, El Hajj pointed out to Article 518, which addresses cases involving sexual relations obtained through deception based on a promise of marriage. According to her, this article similarly allows offenders to avoid punishment if they subsequently marry the victim, thereby preserving another pathway to impunity.

In KAFA’s assessment, although Article 522 itself disappeared from the Penal Code, its underlying philosophy remains through these remaining provisions.

So yes, Article 522 was repealed. However, through Articles 505 and 518, its effects were essentially restored.

El Hajj believed the remaining provisions represent more than isolated legal exceptions; they undermine the broader objective of ensuring justice for survivors of sexual violence.

Based on KAFA’s experience assisting victims, she said child marriage itself constitutes a form of legalized sexual violence because minors cannot exercise genuine, fully informed consent. For survivors who have already experienced sexual assault, forcing or encouraging marriage to the offender under the justification of protecting family honor or preserving social traditions compounds the trauma rather than resolving it.

Imagine what it means for someone who has already been raped to then be forced to marry her rapist under the pretext of ‘protecting her honor’.

She thus argued that true justice requires placing survivors’ rights above social customs and ensuring that criminal accountability cannot be negotiated through marriage.

The need to complete the reform

Looking forward, El Hajj identified several reforms that she believes are necessary to eliminate the remaining gaps in Lebanese legislation.

Foremost among them is the repeal or amendment of Articles 505 and 518 so that marriage can never serve as a basis for exempting perpetrators from criminal responsibility. She stated that offenders should face the full penalties prescribed by law regardless of any subsequent marriage to the victim.

Our objective is very clear: the repeal of Articles 505 and 518.

KAFA also continues to advocate for establishing 18 as the minimum legal age of marriage through civil legislation. According to El Hajj, aligning marriage laws with the legal age of majority would strengthen child protection, eliminate inconsistencies within Lebanese legislation, and reduce opportunities for abuse.

More broadly, she asserted that reforms should prioritize accountability, victim protection, psychological support for survivors, and legal provisions that clearly affirm that sexual violence cannot be erased or legitimized through marriage.

Hence, nearly 10 years after Article 522’s repeal, the debate has shifted from celebrating a symbolic victory to pursuing comprehensive reform. For organizations such as KAFA, achieving genuine justice requires removing every legal exception that enables perpetrators to evade accountability and ensuring that the law consistently protects survivors, particularly minors, without compromise.