Syria Investigates 87 Terrorism Court Judges Over Alleged Abuses
[Damascus] The Justice Ministry in Syria’s transitional government has referred 87 judges from the country’s now-defunct Terrorism Court to the Judicial Inspection Department for investigation into potential disciplinary and legal violations. The judges, who served under the ousted government of Bashar Assad, are suspected of issuing unfair rulings, including death sentences, against individuals who opposed the former regime.
A source within the Justice Ministry told The Media Line that all the judges under investigation were active during the Assad administration and are believed to have played a role in politically motivated judicial decisions.
In an official statement received by The Media Line, the ministry confirmed the referral, stating, “Eighty-seven judges who served in the Terrorism Court from its establishment in 2013 until its suspension after the fall of the previous regime have been referred to the Judicial Inspection Department for investigation regarding their actions during their tenure in the court.”
The statement further explained that the Judicial Inspection Department would compile a final report detailing the disciplinary and legal violations of the judges, which will then be submitted to the Supreme Judicial Council for review.
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
The Justice Ministry also announced that judges who continued to hold positions in the Syrian government after Ahmed al-Sharaa became president and Mohammed al-Bashir took over as prime minister would also be subject to investigation.
The list of referred judges includes Abdel Nasser al-Dallali, the head of the State Council, Syria’s highest administrative court. Al-Dallali previously served as an adviser in the Terrorism Chamber of the Court of Cassation. Others include Abed Hassan, president of the First Criminal Court in Damascus; Samer Mikhael Eid, president of the Eighth Civil Court of Appeals in Damascus; Nizar Ismail, president of the Financial and Economic Criminal Court in Damascus; Maimon Ezzedine, president of the Second Misdemeanor Appeals Court in Rural Damascus; and Wissam Yazbek, a member of the Supreme Constitutional Court.
The investigation also includes retired judges who previously worked in the Terrorism Court, such as Kamel Owais, who headed the Terrorism Chamber in the Court of Cassation, and Mohieddin Hallak, a former adviser in the same chamber.
The Terrorism Court was established in 2012 by the Assad government as a successor to the Supreme State Security Court, which was abolished in April 2011 following the outbreak of the Syrian uprising. The Syrian Network for Human Rights has described the Terrorism Court as an extension of Syria’s security apparatus, arguing that it was used as a tool to imprison Assad’s opponents under terrorism charges without due process.
The Anti-Terrorism Law, enacted in 2012, introduced severe penalties, including long-term imprisonment with hard labor or execution, for those accused of terrorism-related crimes. Human rights groups have documented cases in which individuals were sentenced based on fabricated charges with no credible evidence presented in court.
Before the fall of the Assad regime, the Terrorism Court comprised 15 civilian and military judges acting as prosecutors, alongside 11 investigative chambers, each led by a judge, most of whom were military personnel. Judges were appointed by presidential decree and operated under the regime’s direct influence.
Since the start of the Syrian revolution in 2011, hundreds of thousands of citizens have been imprisoned under orders from the Terrorism Court, according to human rights organizations. Many detainees were executed without a fair trial, further cementing the court’s reputation as a political instrument rather than a legitimate judicial body.
The decision to investigate the judges has been met with cautious optimism among Syrians seeking accountability for past abuses. Many view the probe as a crucial step toward justice and restitution for victims of politically motivated rulings. The coming months will determine whether the Judicial Inspection Department’s findings lead to tangible legal consequences for those implicated in wrongful convictions and human rights violations.
