The Lebanese Parliament’s recent tensions over electoral reforms have laid bare the political calculations of the main blocs.
Statements by Hezbollah MP Ali Fayyad that “there is no level playing field in expat elections” capture why the Shiite Duo (Hezbollah and the Amal Movement), along with the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), refuse to amend the current voting law. That law limits expatriate voters to strictly electing six MPs, rather than allowing them to vote in their home constituencies like residents.
This stance is rooted in the 2022 elections, when overseas ballots overwhelmingly favored opposition candidates, especially independents and reformists. For Hezbollah, Amal, and the FPM, any shift risks further eroding their parliamentary share.
Lebanon’s political forces are sharply divided: on one side are Hezbollah, Amal, and the FPM, who oppose amending Article 122, which reserves six seats for expatriates; on the other side stand the Lebanese Forces, Kataeb, the Democratic Gathering, independents, and reformist MPs, all of whom back proposals to let expatriates vote in their districts in 2026.
Tensions flared during Monday’s parliamentary session when Speaker Nabih Berri rejected efforts to place the amendment on the agenda. Researcher Mohammad Shamseddine told Asharq Al-Awsat the refusal stems from a fear that expanded expatriate voting would yield even more unfavorable results for these factions.
Shamseddine noted that about one million Lebanese abroad are eligible to vote, almost a third of the electorate. In 2022, around 141,000 expatriates cast ballots, influencing outcomes in eight districts and twelve seats, mostly favoring reformists. The number of overseas voters could rise to 250,000 in 2026, amplifying their impact.
According to Shamseddine, Hezbollah and its allies secured only around 29,000 expat votes in 2022, compared to 27,000 for the Lebanese Forces alone. This gap is expected to widen further.
For analyst Sami Nader, director of the Levant Institute for Strategic Affairs, Hezbollah’s resistance also reflects its desire to prevent military setbacks from morphing into political defeat. He argues the party is keen to cling to what influence it has left, especially since it struggles to mobilize diaspora voters as effectively as it does domestically.
Meanwhile, expatriate groups and Maronite bishops abroad have pressed Lebanon’s government to protect their right to vote in their home constituencies. Maronite Bishop Charbel Tarabay warned against any attempt to “deprive expatriates of their connection to the homeland.”
Opposition parties, including the Lebanese Forces and Kataeb, have vowed to fight what they see as an effort to sideline the diaspora. As Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea declared: “We will use every democratic and legal means to restore expatriates’ right to vote in their districts, to keep them tied to Lebanon.”
