An Initial Corrective Measure that Requires Legislative Completion within the Transitional Justice Process
Available in:
Press Release
Damascus – The Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR) today issued a legal analytical report entitled ” Legal Analysis of Legislative Decree No. 16 of 2025 Regarding the Cancellation of Precautionary Seizure Decisions: An Initial Corrective Measure that Requires Legislative Completion within the Transitional Justice Process” The report addresses the decree issued by the Syrian Transitional Government on May 10, 2025, which abolished the precautionary seizure decisions issued by the Ministry of Finance during the period from 2012 to 2024. These decisions were based on Decree No. 63 of 2012, without judicial justification or pursuant to direct security orders.
The report notes in its introduction that good legislation in a transitional context is not measured solely by repealing previous effects, but rather by its ability to establish a legal basis that prevents the recurrence of violations, guarantees the primacy of rights, and extends the effect of repeal to include all related violations. It emphasizes that legal drafting must achieve the three complementary elements: clarity of text, comprehensiveness of effect, and effectiveness of implementation, something that has not yet been achieved in the content of the decree.
This report comes at a pivotal moment in Syria’s transitional phase, as the new government attempts to dismantle the legacy of gross legal violations perpetuated by Bashar al-Assad’s regime, most notably the extrajudicial pretrial detention of tens of thousands of citizens for political and retaliatory reasons. Decree 16 represents the first official legal step to restore respect for the rule of law by recognizing the invalidity of part of the repressive legislative structure.
Serious legal gaps in the decree’s content
Despite the decree’s importance, the report indicates that it suffers from fundamental shortcomings in its legislative structure and resulting legal effect, most notably:
- The judicial seizure orders issued by the Public Prosecution or investigating judges, which were issued in similar exceptional legal contexts, often lacked even the minimum legal safeguards.
- The absence of any reference to the fate of properties whose precautionary seizure was transformed into an executive seizure or permanently confiscated, whether they were registered in the name of the state or transferred to third parties associated with the former regime.
- The failure to explicitly repeal Legislative Decree No. 63 of 2012, despite it being the primary legal framework that legitimized seizure orders.
- The absence of clear mechanisms for redressing harm, whether through the restoration of rights to their owners (restitution) or compensation if this is not possible through a court ruling.
- The exclusion of affected persons residing abroad or in areas outside the control of the transitional government, and the lack of alternatives or procedural facilities for them.
Systematic Documentation of Violations: The Numbers Speak
The report relied on a documentation database accumulated by the Syrian Network for Human Rights since 2011, according to which:
- At least 40,602 decisions were issued by the Ministry of Finance against the property and assets of approximately 320,000 Syrian citizens between 2012 and 2024.
- The assets, properties, and bank accounts were seized based on security reports or verbal instructions, without notice, trial, or the right to appeal.
- The majority of the decisions were concentrated in areas outside the control of the Bashar al-Assad regime that witnessed widespread protests or displacement, indicating their political and vengeful nature and their connection to reshaping the demographic and economic landscape.
Through a series of previous human rights reports, the Syrian Network for Human Rights has documented the legislative and political context in which seizure and confiscation were enacted in Syria.
The most dangerous thing that was ignored: confiscations and converting seizures into execution
The report confirms that the previous regime transformed precautionary seizures into a tool for transferring ownership by transforming them into executive seizures, allowing thousands of properties to be transferred to the state or loyal parties without a judicial basis.
The network emphasizes that restitution (return of property) is the primary legal option for redressing damages, and that financial compensation may only be resorted to when restitution is impossible based on a clear judicial decision.
Key Conclusions from the Report
- The decree represents a belated recognition of the invalidity of the security confiscation policy, but it only addresses a limited portion of the legislative body related to confiscation.
- The decree cannot have a real impact unless it is accompanied by subsequent corrective measures, including the repeal of other exceptional provisions and the opening of a process for reparations and the restoration of rights.
- An institutional approach is needed that ensures transparency, the possibility of appeal, and civil society participation, along with international technical oversight.
- The deliberate disregard for victims of final confiscation threatens to entrench injustice rather than address it, and opens the door to recurrence of violations with merely amended legal formulations.
Comprehensive recommendations on the real estate violation file
The report presented a set of detailed recommendations, most notably:
- Explicitly repeal Decree 63 of 2012 and all exceptional provisions related to seizure and confiscation.
- Incorporate judicial seizure decisions into the review and annulment framework, particularly those issued under security pressure or pursuant to the Anti-Terrorism Law.
- Establish a special law for redress, including mechanisms for restitution or fair compensation.
- Freeze all real estate transactions related to confiscated properties until their legality is verified.
- Publish lists of individuals covered by the decree, and enable objections and restitution.
- Open avenues for institutional and individual accountability against entities that implemented invalid seizure decisions.
- Involve civil society in monitoring implementation and documentation and request technical support from specialized international bodies.
SNHR emphasizes that the report represents part of a broader effort to document the property and legislative violations that have affected Syrians over the past years. It emphasizes that any genuine reform process must begin with dismantling the legal system that has legitimized tyranny and violations. It calls for complementing this partial measure with broader legislative and institutional reforms, and for the development of a legal process that places the restoration of rights at the heart of transitional justice.
