The deterioration of Hannibal Muammar Gaddafi’s health and his subsequent transfer to a hospital have forcibly pushed his detention case in Lebanon back into the public consciousness. This situation has metastasised from a frozen legal file into a sweeping humanitarian and political crisis, prompting fundamental inquiries into the Libyan state’s duty to safeguard its citizens beyond its borders.
The Background to Detention and International Legal Scrutiny
Gaddafi has been confined in Lebanon since December 2015, following an organised abduction and forcible transfer from Syria. The Lebanese authorities justify his detention by accusing him of “withholding information” related to the 1978 disappearance of Imam Musa Sadr. His protracted confinement for over ten years is broadly condemned by human rights groups. The legal premise of his custody is highly questionable, given that Gaddafi was only two years old at the time of the Sadr incident.
Domestic Pressures and Official Libyan Condemnation
The recent health developments have provoked an outpouring of anger and sharp responses from diverse Libyan entities. The Gaddadfa tribe held Lebanon “fully responsible, both morally and legally,” for his safety, denouncing his ongoing detention as a “crime against humanity.” Furthermore, the Council for Liberties and Human Rights demanded urgent international intervention and an investigation under UN supervision, underscoring that the file is a genuine test of Lebanon’s commitment to its rights obligations. The Libyan Association of Judicial Body Members called for the establishment of a joint Libyan-international legal and human rights coalition to defend Gaddafi in the Lebanese courts. In a notable escalation, his brother, Al-Saadi Gaddafi, directly accused Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri of accountability for any harm that may befall him.
Parliamentary and Advisory Perspectives
Statements from Libyan officials confirm the transformation of the case from a family affair into a symbol of national dignity and sovereignty. Jaballah Al-Shaibani, a member of the House of Representatives, linked Gaddafi’s situation to a breakdown of “humanity’s” values, asserting that “the devil has become the master of the situation.” Similarly, Saad Bin Sharada, a member of the High Council of State, deemed Hannibal’s detention an act of “injustice and tyranny” over an event that predates his birth, accusing the Lebanese judiciary of failure due to the influence of “power centres” that have enforced his unlawful confinement. These positions affirm that the case is viewed as a struggle for national sovereignty against perceived legal and diplomatic overreach.
Justice Ministry’s Response and Defence Querie
The Ministry of Justice in the Government of National Unity confirmed that Hannibal’s health deterioration stems from years of illegal detention, holding the Lebanese authorities entirely responsible for his life and well-being. The Ministry also mentioned a formal diplomatic note sent in April containing a “fair” proposal to resolve the crisis, but stated they have yet to receive any reply. On the legal front, expert Thuraya Al-Twaiby expressed bewilderment at the 10-year detention without referral to court, questioning why his abductors, who transferred him while he was supposedly under political asylum, have not been prosecuted. Likewise, Charbel Khoury, a member of the Lebanese defence team, stressed that detaining an individual for ten years without investigation constitutes a constitutional and legal breach, emphasising that Hannibal was the victim of an “armed gang” that has escaped punishment.
Prospects for Resolution and the Lebanese Judicial Stalemate
In a development offering a potential solution, Zaher Badr El Din, the son of one of the plaintiffs, announced his consent to Hannibal Gaddafi’s release. However, this optimism is tempered by the stance of Judge Hassan Al-Shami, head of the Sadr case follow-up committee, who affirmed that the file remains within the purview of a judiciary that “rejects political deals or settlements,” attributing the protracted nature of the detention to the “lack of cooperation” from post-revolution Libyan authorities. This dichotomy reveals a judicial inertia, where the Lebanese judicial system appears divided between those seeking closure and those determined to maintain the file as a leverage tool.
Conclusion: A Crossroads and the International Pressure
The Hannibal Gaddafi case stands at the intersection of law and politics: while the Lebanese authorities insist on the legality of the detention under the pretext of withholding information, Libyan parties regard the file as entirely political, used by Beirut for negotiation. Observers suggest that seeking recourse through the UN Human Rights Council is Libya’s strongest option to internationalise the issue and break the current legal and political deadlock. With his health worsening and pressures mounting, the Libyan state must take decisive steps to recover its citizen in accordance with international norms, or the file will remain evidence of state weakness and the triumph of politics over justice.