The Syrian Ministry of Justice has announced the start of processing case files of detainees accused of committing crimes and human rights violations against civilians, marking a significant step in the transitional government’s commitment to accountability and the rule of law. The initiative, coordinated with the Ministry of Interior, aims to rebuild trust in judicial institutions and uphold human rights in post-Assad Syria. However, legal experts have raised concerns about jurisdictional overreach, highlighting the need for a robust legal framework to ensure fair and effective prosecutions.
Ministry of Justice’s Accountability Measures
In a statement released via its official Telegram channel, the Ministry of Justice outlined its efforts to strengthen the judiciary as a cornerstone of Syria’s transitional phase. The ministry has undertaken institutional reforms, including the removal of judges implicated in human rights abuses under the former Assad regime. The Attorney General has initiated public lawsuits against several high-profile figures, including Atef Najib, Ahmad Badr al-Din Hassoun, Muhammad al-Shaar, and Ibrahim al-Huwaija, for alleged war crimes. These actions, the ministry emphasized, align with legal frameworks and do not conflict with the mandate of the National Commission for Transitional Justice (NCTJ), established by Presidential Decree No. 20 on May 17, 2025.
The ministry reaffirmed its commitment to fair trials that adhere to legal standards and procedural norms, ensuring the rights of detainees while advancing the rule of law within the transitional justice framework. The statement concluded with a pledge to pursue judicial processes with transparency and independence, reflecting a clear political will to hold perpetrators accountable and deliver justice to victims and their families.
Legal and Procedural Concerns
The announcement has sparked debate, with human rights lawyer Michal Shammas criticizing the Ministry of Justice’s involvement as an overstep of the NCTJ’s exclusive mandate. Shammas argues that investigating and prosecuting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide—crimes attributed to the named detainees—falls solely under the NCTJ’s jurisdiction, as stipulated in Article 49 of the Constitutional Declaration and Decree No. 20. He warns that the ministry’s actions constitute a serious violation of these provisions, potentially undermining the credibility of transitional justice efforts.
Shammas outlined several critical issues:
- Lack of Legal Framework: Syria’s penal code does not currently include provisions for war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide, necessitating legislative amendments to incorporate standards from the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Without such reforms, prosecutions lack legal grounding.
- Judicial Incapacity: The Syrian judiciary, hampered by corruption and inefficiency, is ill-equipped to handle complex international crimes. Shammas advocates for specialized prosecution units, criminal chambers, and an appeals court under the NCTJ, along with training for judges and prosecutors on international legal standards and evidence procedures.
- Risk to Credibility: Bypassing the NCTJ risks distorting justice processes, eroding public trust, and weakening the judiciary’s legitimacy. Shammas warns that premature actions by the Ministry could perpetuate impunity rather than resolve it.
Broader Context: Transitional Justice in Syria
The initiative follows the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in December 2024, which opened a historic opportunity for accountability. The NCTJ is tasked with addressing grave human rights violations by the former regime, uncovering the truth, ensuring victim-centered justice, and fostering national reconciliation. However, its mandate is limited to state-perpetrated crimes, excluding violations by non-state actors, which has drawn criticism for potentially leaving some victims without recourse.
The Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR) estimates that at least 149,360 Syrians were detained or forcibly disappeared between 2011 and 2024, with the Assad regime responsible for 88% of cases. The discovery of mass graves and the ongoing search for over 100,000 missing persons underscore the scale of the challenge. International mechanisms, such as the UN’s International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) and the Independent Institution on Missing Persons (IIMP), are supporting evidence collection, while European courts have pursued universal jurisdiction cases, such as the conviction of a Syrian doctor in Germany in June 2025.
Implications and Challenges
The Ministry’s move comes amid heightened public scrutiny, exemplified by the controversial death of Youssef Labbad in custody, which raised concerns about ongoing abuses by security forces. The transitional government’s integration of former militia members into security roles and the loss of prison records post-Assad further complicate accountability efforts. Amnesty International has called for nationwide consultations with victims to ensure inclusive justice mechanisms, a step the NCTJ has yet to fully implement.
The Syrian Ministry of Justice’s efforts to process detainee files signal a commitment to accountability, but significant hurdles remain. Legal and procedural concerns, as highlighted by experts like Michal Shammas, underscore the need for legislative reforms, specialized judicial bodies, and adherence to the NCTJ’s mandate. As Syria navigates its transitional phase, ensuring transparent, fair, and internationally compliant justice processes is critical to rebuilding trust and delivering justice to victims of decades-long atrocities.
