1. Home
2. Lebanon
3. Teachers’ Law Reissue or a Return to Street Protests

On April 17, President Joseph Aoun submitted two appeals to the Constitutional Council. The first challenges Law No. 1, which automatically came into effect and regulates leases of non-residential properties. The second targets Law No. 2, also automatically enacted, which amends specific provisions related to private school faculty and school budget regulations. Both laws were published in the Official Gazette on April 3, 2025.

At the time, the Presidency said the purpose of the appeals was to clarify specific provisions in each law to facilitate their implementation in the interest of all concerned parties.

Last Tuesday, the Constitutional Council issued Decision No. 5 on the appeal against Law No. 1 and Decision No. 4 on the appeal against Law No. 2. Both laws, which came into force automatically, took effect on April 3, 2025.

In both rulings, the Constitutional Council reached the same conclusion: the laws are invalid because the procedures for their enactment failed to meet constitutional requirements. The one-month period granted to the President to issue the laws had not yet expired, making their publication a violation of Article 57 of the Constitution. As a result, the laws were not legally in force at the time they were published.

In this context, Patrick Rizkallah, a member of the Teachers’ Syndicate Executive Council, stressed that it is unacceptable for 5,000 retired teachers to be receiving monthly salaries of just $20 to $30—amounts that fall far below a dignified standard of living. He called it a disgrace that educators who devoted their lives to teaching are now earning such meager sums. Rizkallah also noted that teachers receiving a maximum of $1,000 in end-of-service compensation after 30 years of service are facing an unbearable situation—particularly after spending five years working for almost no pay.

The Teachers’ Syndicate, which represents 5,000 retired educators, has called for an urgent correction in the law’s issuance and its immediate republication in the Official Gazette to ensure proper implementation. This demand follows Parliament’s approval of amendments to the law, which are backed by both the Syndicate and the Union of Private Educational Institutions. The Syndicate stressed that neither retired nor active teachers should bear the consequences of disputes between constitutional bodies over the law’s issuance and publication. It also emphasized that forcing retired teachers—many of whom are struggling to survive—to pay the price for this institutional conflict, after enduring five years of harsh working conditions, is unacceptable. The Syndicate warned that if the issue is not addressed, teachers may be forced to take to the streets to demand their rights.

This week, the Teachers’ Syndicate met with Minister of Education and Higher Education Rima Karami to discuss the Constitutional Council’s ruling and the allocation of LBP 650 billion recently approved by Parliament. The Syndicate urged Karami to coordinate with Minister of Finance Yassine Jaber to ensure that the funds are promptly transferred to the pension fund for retired teachers. It also called for fair recognition and compensation for degree holders teaching new curriculum subjects such as economics and computer science. Finally, the Syndicate requested that daycare hours be separated from regular school hours, and that the work of daycare teachers be counted as part of the official teaching hours for primary school educators.

According to informed sources, the General Secretariat of the Council of Ministers is preparing to send an official letter—along with the two aforementioned laws—to the Directorate-General of the Presidency for their formal reissuance. Once reissued, the laws will be republished, triggering a new one-month window for submitting appeals to the Constitutional Council, which will then reexamine the substance of each law. Notably, the amendment to the Compensation Fund Financing Law was published in the Official Gazette on May 21, 2025, raising questions about the enforceability of its provisions—particularly since it includes a revision to the very law the Constitutional Council rejected in its most recent ruling.