In a country deeply divided politically and socially, like Libya, government decisions often spark widespread controversy both domestically and internationally. This month, statements by the Minister of Interior in the Government of National Unity, based in Tripoli, have triggered a wave of anger and questions about the future of personal freedoms in the country. The minister announced his intention to impose measures requiring women to wear the hijab, barring women from traveling without a male guardian, imposing strict regulations on clothing and hairstyles, and establishing a Public Morality Authority to monitor social behavior. These statements have elicited mixed reactions, with some local and international observers classifying them as a step toward restricting public freedoms in a country striving to overcome its crises. 

The Minister’s Decisions: Reshaping Society or Suppressing Freedoms? 

At a recent press conference, the Minister of Interior announced a series of measures he described as aiming to protect the moral values of Libyan society These decisions include mandating women to wear the hijab, prohibiting women from traveling abroad unless accompanied by or with the consent of a male guardian, and banning the import of clothing deemed  immoral,  referencing modern youth fashion. He also declared his intent to outlaw certain hairstyles, describing them as alien to Libyan culture. 

The minister further outlined plans to establish a new security body under the name Public Morality Authority, whose primary task would be to monitor public behavior. He stated that this authority would be responsible for detaining young men and women seen together in public without proof of familial ties or marriage. This decision has sparked widespread discontent among citizens, particularly as it requires married couples to carry legal documents proving their marriage when in public spaces. The minister claims these decisions were made in response to increasing social demands for the preservation of Libyan moral values amid what he described as a foreign cultural invasion. 

However, observers argue that these statements represent an attempt to reshape Libyan society by imposing conservative values that conflict with the aspirations of a broad segment of the population. 

Domestic Outrage: Libyan Society Between Shock and Division 

Locally, the statements by Minister of Interior Imad Trabelsi have sparked widespread debate among Libyans, with reactions split between opponents who see these statements as a blatant violation of personal freedoms and the law, and supporters who view them as a necessary step to preserve the moral values of society. This division reflects the complexity of Libya’s political and social landscape, where religious and social issues intersect with political divisions and cultural conflicts. 

Many human rights activists have expressed their outright rejection of these statements, asserting that they constitute a clear infringement on citizens’ rights and personal freedoms. Human rights advocate Fathi Al-Bushti, speaking to Al-Marsad newspaper, described these measures as unlawful, noting that current Libyan laws do not mandate the hijab or bar women from traveling without a male guardian.  Such statements lack a clear legal foundation and do not reflect the Islamic Sharia law that governs Libyan legislation, as there are no stipulated penalties in Islam for women who do not wear the hijab,  he said. 

Opponents like Al-Bushti question the basis on which the Minister of Interior proposed such measures, especially given the absence of Libyan laws supporting these decisions. Activist Souad bin Amer, in a statement to Eye Libya, said that these statements reflect a dangerous trend of restricting individual freedoms, considering them an attempt to exploit power to impose moral guardianship on society. 

Furthermore, critics have raised a fundamental question about the compatibility of these measures with Libyan constitutional and legal texts. They emphasized that while Islamic Sharia serves as a legal reference in Libya, it does not prescribe direct punishments for women who choose not to wear the hijab. 

On the other hand, a segment of citizens has expressed full support for the minister’s statements, considering them a positive step toward reinforcing moral values and protecting the cultural identity of Libyan society. A hashtag titled #WeAreAllImadTrabelsi gained significant traction among supporters on social media platforms. Through this hashtag, some called for the minister’s statements to be turned into enforceable decisions, expressing their readiness to support this initiative through large demonstrations and public appeals to the government. Indeed, gatherings have already been organized in some Libyan cities to back these statements, with demonstrators raising slogans demanding the implementation of the announced moral laws at the earliest opportunity. One participant in these demonstrations told Al-Raed website, Libyan society needs these measures to curb the moral decline among youth, and we hope the minister’s announcements will be implemented without delay. 

The support extended beyond the general public, including some well-known figures in Libya’s artistic circles. Prominent Libyan artist Ashraf Al-Sharif, commonly referred to as Ashraf Raaish said in a radio interview that the minister’s statements reflect the demands of a large segment of society. He added, many people wish to promote authentic Libyan values, and these decisions resonate with their desire to protect our society from the negative influences threatening our identity. 

Additionally, emerging artist Asil Buhair called on the Minister of Interior in a social media post to expedite the formalization of these decisions, stating,  Such steps are long overdue. We need laws to protect our morals and reprioritize societal values. 

While reactions to Trabelsi’s statements remain divided, this polarization mirrors the complex reality of Libyan society, which grapples with intertwined challenges of preserving cultural and traditional values on one side and respecting individual freedoms and human rights on the other. 

Amid these circumstances, questions persist about whether the government will take actual steps to implement the minister’s statements as official policies or face increasing pressure from rights activists and the international community to backtrack on these controversial directions. 

The Implications of Trabelsi’s Statements on Libyan Society: Goals and Motives 

Many observers believe the lack of a legal or religious foundation for Minister of Interior Imad Trabelsi’s statements raises numerous questions about their underlying purpose. It is evident to the minister that these measures cannot be effectively enforced by any member of the Ministry of Interior, and should an official attempt to do so, they risk facing charges if a citizen files a complaint against them. This begs the question: What are the minister’s motives behind such statements, and what are their potential consequences? 

During our investigation, we sought to assess the impact these statements have had on Libyan society, particularly given predictions by many rights activists that these statements will lead to increased harassment of women, both verbally and online, as well as heightened street-level harassment. 

In this context, Leila (a pseudonym) shared her experience, stating:

 Since these statements were issued, every time I decide to leave the house, whether for personal errands, university, or any other purpose, I face a series of shocking incidents. As soon as I start my car and drive, I find myself repeatedly subjected to threats, insults, and obscene remarks. The situation escalates to the point where I am often chased by cars, putting my life in severe danger. On one occasion, I narrowly avoided a life-threatening accident because of such behavior. 

Leila continued,  At university, which is supposed to be a place of learning and civility, the situation is no better. As soon as I enter campus, I am subjected to insults and slurs targeting both me and my family. Hearing derogatory comments and curses has become a daily ordeal, especially the recurring taunt,  Call Imad, where’s Imad?  These statements from the Minister of Interior, ostensibly aimed at protecting us, have not provided any sense of security. On the contrary, I feel increasingly endangered with each passing day. Leaving my home has become a genuine threat to my safety, and I now live in constant fear. 

She concluded, I sincerely appeal to the Minister of Interior to reconsider this decision and to ensure the safety of citizens. We need policies that truly reflect the people’s best interests and provide us with the protection we deserve. 

The issue is not limited to direct interactions between citizens on the streets but has also extended to social media platforms. Hana (a pseudonym) stated:

 After the Minister of Interior’s decision to impose the hijab, I faced personal harassment when I was discussing a general topic on X (formerly Twitter). Someone took my photo without my consent and used it to mock and ridicule me. The comments quickly turned into inappropriate remarks about my appearance, turning the discussion into a personal attack. The level of offensive comments and lack of respect was incredibly distressing. 

She continued, What I experienced highlights the unacceptable level of cyberbullying and harassment that individuals may face under such decisions. It underscores the urgent need to promote a culture of respect and dialogue instead of exclusion and personal attacks. 

The primary fear among those opposing the Minister’s statements is the potential for an environment where harassment against women becomes normalized or justified. Critics argue that statements like those made by the Minister of Interior provide implicit cover for unacceptable behaviors targeting women. While such misconduct has undoubtedly occurred in the past, the concern now lies in the legitimization of these actions under the guise of morality enforcement. 

Nuhah (a pseudonym), a university student, shared her encounter:

The harasser was an older man, probably in his late twenties or thirties, wearing a uniform labeled ‘Ministry of Interior,’ indicating he was part of a state entity. One morning, as I was heading to university, I noticed him near the gate. He was accompanied by a group of younger men who were not in uniform. As I walked past, he said, ‘Better get ready to wear the hijab; it’s coming.’ His remark was deeply offensive. I turned to him immediately and retorted angrily, ‘Keep your mouth shut!’ He continued to comment, so I firmly responded, ‘I will report you and make sure your superiors know about your behavior!’ I then walked away as the younger men laughed at him because of my response. 

Nuhah added My reactions are often assertive because I firmly believe that my personal choices are entirely my own concern, and no one has the right to interfere. I don’t interfere in anyone’s affairs, and I certainly do not accept anyone intruding into mine. Anyone who tries to infringe on my privacy deserves a strong response. 

The issue has not been limited to women; young men have also experienced harassment. Mohammed (a pseudonym), who works as a company representative, shared his story after the minister’s statements:

 I was at Mitiga Airport, waiting for foreign employees from my company to help with their paperwork and escort them to the company headquarters. A young woman approached me and asked if she could connect to my mobile hotspot to make a call. I agreed and was entering the password on her phone when three security officers approached me and said, ‘It is forbidden to speak with the girl.’ Despite explaining my role as a company representative and identifying myself, they forced me to leave the airport. 

 I left the airport, wondering: Is there any law in Libya that prevents me from speaking to a girl in public spaces, and in full view of others? 

International Reactions: Harsh Criticism and Warnings Against Regressive Policies 

The statements by Libyan Interior Minister Imad Trabelsi regarding the hijab mandate and the establishment of a morality police have drawn sharp criticism internationally, especially from human rights organizations. 

Amnesty International condemned the statements as a violation of women’s rights, noting that mandating the hijab and restricting gender interactions contradict Libya’s international human rights commitments. 

Similarly, Human Rights Watch described the measures as a blatant violation of the rights of Libyan women and girls, calling on Libyan authorities and the international community to firmly oppose any steps that would infringe upon fundamental human rights. 

Diplomatically, the British Embassy in Libya expressed concern over these statements, urging the Government of National Unity to adhere to international human rights standards. The United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) also announced it was closely monitoring developments, warning that the proposed measures could lead to widespread criticism from the UN Human Rights Council. 

The European Union voiced similar concerns, emphasizing that actions restricting women’s rights and personal freedoms are incompatible with efforts to build a modern, democratic state in Libya. Other international organizations, such as the International Federation for Human Rights and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network, cautioned that such statements signal a dangerous trend of undermining individual liberties in Libya. 

Observers have warned of potential international measures should these statements translate into actionable policies. They suggest that European countries may leverage the United Nations and the Human Rights Council to impose targeted sanctions or restrictions on the Libyan government if it is found to be backtracking on freedoms and human rights. 

The international criticism of Trabelsi’s statements highlights the sensitive nature of Libya’s current situation. Such measures risk increasing Libya’s isolation on the global stage at a time when the country is in dire need of external support for reconstruction and stability. 

Libya: Balancing Values and Protecting Freedoms 

A significant number of those interviewed believe that such statements pave the way for continued violations of personal privacy in Libya. While no one denies the importance of the hijab within the Islamic religious framework and its cultural and religious significance, the core objection revolves around the manner of its enforcement, which many describe as coercive and unjustified, contradicting the principles of personal freedom that are enshrined in the religion itself. 

Critics point out that these statements lack clear precedents, either in Islamic history or in Libya’s modern context, where the country has never seen coercive mechanisms for enforcing religious or social practices. They argue that such policies evoke the painful experiences of countries like Afghanistan in the 1990s, where stringent social and religious restrictions on women led to international isolation and widespread domestic suffering. 

Opponents highlight that imposing the hijab is not only absent as a punitive measure in Islamic law, but that the religion itself emphasizes persuasion rather than coercion in matters of worship. They cite the Quranic verse,  There is no compulsion in religion (2:256), as a testament to the inherent contradiction between Islamic principles and the coercive approach suggested by recent statements. 

From a legal perspective, numerous human rights activists argue that these statements contradict Libyan laws, which guarantee individuals freedom of movement and choice and afford women equal rights to men. There are no legislative provisions in Libyan law permitting the forced imposition of the hijab or prohibiting women from traveling without a male guardian. 

Additionally, many fear that if such measures were to be implemented officially, they would further deepen societal divisions in a country already suffering from profound political and social fragmentation. Some view the focus on issues like the hijab and social behavior as an attempt to divert attention from more pressing problems, such as the escalating economic crises, deteriorating basic services, and worsening security situation. 

One activist we spoke with stated:

 The Libyan people need decisions that promote stability, create jobs, and improve living conditions—not laws that complicate their daily lives and impose new restrictions. These policies widen the gap between the people and the government and may escalate protests. 

Libya, with its long history of cultural diversity, has always been a society balancing conservatism and modernity. The country has never had a precedent for enforcing religious values through coercion, as adherence to Islamic principles has traditionally stemmed from personal conviction and choice. Many now view these statements as a threat to Libya’s tolerant traditions, imposing a model alien to the local culture. 

Social researcher Nazar (a pseudonym) noted:

 These statements could lead to drastic changes in the nature of Libyan society, but such changes are neither organic nor reflective of the citizens’ aspirations. If we aim to preserve moral values, it must be through education and awareness, not through the use of state power. 

Comparisons with other countries’ experiences, such as Afghanistan or Iran, are not uncommon in the Libyan debate today. Many wonder: Could Libya transform into a state governed by similarly repressive tools? Past experiences have shown that imposing values by force often backfires, not only undermining individual freedoms but also destabilizing nations and their international relations. 

In Afghanistan, for example, the imposition of strict social laws led to severe international isolation, creating decades of domestic turmoil and societal tension. This serves as a cautionary tale for Libya, which seeks to rebuild its international standing and stabilize after years of conflict. 

While some defend these statements as an attempt to safeguard Islamic and moral values, others argue that they represent a regression from the path of building a modern and democratic state. Libya, striving to recover from years of division and strife, seems in greater need of policies that foster national unity and uphold individual rights rather than stirring further controversy and division. 

Ultimately, the fundamental question remains: What are the true priorities of the Libyan people? Are they individual freedoms and economic development, or social restrictions justified in the name of protecting values? 

Perhaps the answer lies in honest national dialogue that places the interests of Libyan citizens above all else. The Libyan government must recognize that decisions conflicting with local traditions, national laws, and international obligations may come at a higher long-term cost—not just politically, but also in terms of societal stability and the country’s future.