A recently filed legal complaint in France has reignited polarising debates among Syrians about justice, identity, and transitional accountability. On April 11, 2025, the French-Alawite Collective, represented by lawyer Pedro Andújar, submitted a lawsuit to the Paris Public Prosecutor accusing Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa and members of his transitional government of genocide and ethnic cleansing against Alawite civilians in Syria’s coastal regions.
The complaint cites atrocities allegedly committed between December 2024 and March 2025, including coordinated attacks by the Syrian National Army’s 25th Division and affiliated militias targeting Alawite civilians, as well as Christians and Sunnis who sought to protect them. According to legal expert Lina Tabal, the group submitted a “comprehensive legal dossier” with documented witness testimonies, aiming to trigger proceedings under France’s principle of universal jurisdiction.
The filing comes at a delicate moment for Syria. Sharaa’s rise to power after Bashar al-Assad’s fall marked a turning point long hailed by many as the start of a democratic transition. Yet, the complaint reflects a parallel and painful narrative: the fear among Alawites—once closely associated with Assad’s regime—that they are now facing collective retribution.
The lawsuit has sparked fierce reactions online. While some opposition voices questioned the timing, political affiliations, and sectarian framing of the complaint, others—particularly from within the Syrian coastal community—defended it as a necessary legal measure to prevent further atrocities and ensure accountability.
Critics argue that the French-Alawite Collective’s identity-based framing echoes the sectarian logic that fuelled Syria’s collapse. They also accuse some of its figures of ties to Assad-era networks. Supporters counter that naming the targeted group is a legal necessity in cases of genocide, not an expression of sectarian bias. “We are not defending Alawites because they are Alawite,” Tabal said, “but because they are being slaughtered for being Alawite.”
The controversy reflects Syria’s fractured public sphere, where justice claims are frequently dismissed as political manoeuvring. Still, the French judiciary’s response to the case could set an important precedent. If admitted, the case would represent one of the first serious international legal challenges to the post-Assad leadership and a test of whether universal jurisdiction can be applied even-handedly across political lines.
Even among Alawite dissenters to Assad—many of whom welcomed the regime’s fall—fears are mounting. Human rights violations in the post-Assad era, if left unaddressed, risk reinforcing a sense of communal siege and undermining efforts toward national reconciliation.
For now, the complaint remains in its preliminary stages. But in a country long scarred by cycles of vengeance and impunity, the path to justice may well depend on whether such efforts can transcend identity politics—and hold all perpetrators accountable, regardless of which regime they serve.
This article was translated and edited by The Syrian Observer. The Syrian Observer has not verified the content of this story. Responsibility for the information and views set out in this article lies entirely with the author.
