Assad’s regime in Syria systematically uses arbitrary detention to suppress dissent, committing over 1 million cases since 2011, writes Fadel Abdelghany. [photo credit: Getty Images]

Bashar al-Assad’s Syria uses arbitrary detention as a systematic policy to silence dissent from Syrians brave enough to call for political change.

I should know, the organisation I founded, the Syrian Network for Human Rights, has been documenting cases of arbitrary detentions since the 2011 Syrian Revolution.

From 2011 to 2023, we documented at least 1.3 million cases of arbitrary detention, of which at least 156,757 of those arrested — including 5,235 children and 10,205 women — are still under arrest or remain forcibly disappeared.

The Syrian regime is responsible for 88% of the total number of arrests, making it the worst perpetrator and the only one to use arbitrary detention as a systemic method and a centralised policy.

And let me be clear, arbitrary detention is synonymous with forced abductions and enforced disappearances, with the regime’s playbook a well-oiled machine.

Inside Syria’s sham courts

The vast majority of arrests, almost 98% of the total number committed, are carried out without judicial warrant or change. The authorities do not identify themselves and those detained are barred from familial contact or a lawyer. The detainees are taken to unknown destinations and cut off from society.

Once detained, Syrian citizens are tortured and are forced to make confessions — of crimes they did not commit — under extreme distress in kangaroo courts that more resemble state security branches than seats of justice.

Based on these worthless ‘confessions’, detainees are then tried in either the Counter-Terrorism Court or the Military Field Court, established by the Syrian regime to eliminate dissidents and political opponents. In no way do either meet the preconditions for a free and fair trial.

That’s if they even get to trial. In the vast majority of cases, no judicial rulings, no charges and no trial are ever brought. Less than a quarter of those arbitrarily detained are referred to these ‘courts’.

This whilst facing conditions of overcrowding, malnutrition, medical negligence, and any contact from the outside world — not that the regime in Syria cares.

Since 2011, they’ve sought to sugar-coat and legitimise its systematic practice of arbitrary detention by issuing 20 fake ‘amnesty’ decrees to those referred to the Counter-Terrorism Court or the Military Field Court.

But, as I’ve already explained, more than 75% of those arbitrarily detained don’t make it to court, making it impossible for them to meet the criteria. As such, these so-called amnesty decrees are reserved for those that the security services want to release. At the Syrian Network for Human Rights, we believe that this entire process is closely monitored by the Syrian regime, which has a solid decision-making structure. 

The worst is yet to come

Today arbitrary detentions continue, and although the Syrian regime is the most notable and frequent culprit, other parties to the conflict including the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces and extremist Islamist groups have carried out such arrests.

The phenomenon of arbitrary detention and the accompanying torture and enforced disappearance are thus among the most significant obstacles that prevent the return of refugees and displaced persons.

From early 2014 to March 2024, the Syrian Network of Human Rights documented at least 3,532 cases of arrest, including 251 children and 251 women, who had returned to their original place of residence in Syria.

The regime was responsible for all of these arrests. Of those detained, 2,149 have since been released while 1,383 are still under arrest, with 969 of these being classified as forcibly disappeared. 

Despite our continued work, all efforts to secure the release of tens of thousands of Syrian citizens unjustly detained have failed. Even the International Committee of the Red Cross has not been able to periodically visit detention centres.

And although the issue of arbitrary detention is present in various UN texts on Syria, not enough pressure has been exerted by the international community and the UN on the Assad regime or other parties to release political detainees, women and children.

Not a single detainee has been released that Assad’s regime has not wanted to release. As such, we’ve been left frustrated and in despair: Assad’s impunity on the international stage is damaging our work at the Syrian Network for Human Rights. We are convinced that we’ve missed a massive number of arbitrary cases. Our numbers, therefore, are the bare minimum.

So long as Assad is in power, and the international and Arab community continues to shield his crimes, the true number of those who sit in arbitrary detention will remain unknown.

And based on all our evidence, we can only conclude that the worst is yet to come, with arbitrary arrests now commonplace for anyone who dares to express their opinion and direct the slightest criticism, no matter how minor, against Assad’s Syrian regime and its barbaric practices.

Originally published on The New Arab Website.

The original article was published on Springer Link website

CIVICUS speaks about Syria’s ongoing civil war and human rights crisis and its prospects for democratic change with Fadel Abdul Ghany, founder and Executive Director of the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR).

Founded in 2011, SNHR is a human rights civil society organisation (CSO) that works to monitor and document human rights violations, protect victims’ rights and hold perpetrators accountable, promoting the conditions for transitional justice and democratic change.

What is the current security situation in Syria?

We have a team of approximately 22 people in Syria that daily monitors and documents human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, torture and forced displacement. We have published daily reports on the civilian death toll for a decade. In September 2023, 55 civilians, including 12 children, were killed. Ninety-seven were killed in August, 55 in July and 42 in June. In the first half of 2023, 501 civilians lost their lives due to the ongoing conflict. Our monthly reports also cover arbitrary arrests, with 223 cases reported in August and 204 in September.

We document crimes committed by all armed groups involved in the conflict, categorising them by perpetrator. From March 2011 to June 2023, a total of 230,465 civilian deaths were reported, with over 87 per cent attributed to Syrian regime forces and Iranian militias, three per cent to Russian forces and two per cent to ISIS. Based on our reporting and news of grave and pervasive violations no territory in Syria can be considered safe or secure.

What are the working conditions for your colleagues in Syria?

We consider ourselves on the frontline because we document violations on the ground and identify perpetrators. Our team operates discreetly in Syria, either from the office or from their homes using fantasy names. We safeguard their identities for security reasons. Their safety is more important than any documentation.

Our team faces intense pressure, and if arbitrarily arrested, they risk severe torture by the regime led by Bashar al-Assad or other parties. We do our best to protect and provide security education to our staff. Our IT infrastructure is highly secure, and we’ve implemented measures to thwart cyber-attacks, which have included Russian attempts to hack our website.

What’s the situation for Syrian refugees?

Many Syrians aren’t safe in other countries either. In Lebanon and Turkey, refugees face the risk of forced return to Syria in violation of international law, specifically the 1951 Refugee Convention. Conditions are dire, with Syrians often blamed for economic hardship in host countries, even though Lebanon and Turkey receive substantial funding from the European Union and other donors to welcome refugees.

The feeling of insecurity and lack of proper protection in neighbouring countries, which host over 70 per cent of refugees, drive Syrians towards-called ‘death boats’ to seek safety elsewhere in Europe. The international community should better distribute the responsibility of welcoming refugees, because the current allocation isn’t fair.

What should the international community do to address Syria’s dire human rights and humanitarian situation?

The international community must intensify efforts to achieve a political transition and end Syria’s 13-year-long conflict, which is taking a lot of lives and causing immense suffering, with widespread torture and forced displacement of half the Syrian population. Any prospect of political transition has been absent due to insufficient international pressure on all parties in the conflict, and particularly on the Assad regime, leaving the Syrian people and the conflict largely neglected.

The international community must actively support efforts to fight impunity. The Assad regime has got away with numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity. There should be a collective effort to bring justice. If accountability is to be achieved, it also requires a political transition leading to the establishment of independent local courts.

Chinese and Russian veto power at the United Nations Security Council obstructs the referral of war crimes to the International Criminal Court. With limited universal jurisdiction, only 27 sentences have been issued in Germany and other countries against Syrian war criminals, mostly from non-state terrorist groups such as Al-Nusra or ISIS.

True accountability requires dismantling the Assad regime, the Syrian National Army, the Syrian Democratic Forces, the Islamist organisation of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham and other non-elected entities ruling Syria through fear.

Aid should be directed to people affected by the recent earthquake and those displaced in northwest and northeast Syria. Continuous assistance is also vital for Middle Eastern states hosting most Syrian refugees. Such comprehensive support on a large scale is essential for advancing the Syrian movement toward democracy.

How is Syrian civil society working for a transition to democracy?

Syrian civil society continues to protest to demand respect for human rights, investigates rights violations and expose perpetrators based on the principle of equality and promote human rights through education. We work hard to spread the culture of human rights in a country with one of the world’s worst human rights records and to get rid of a decades-long dictatorship.

SNHR publishes reports and statements urging a halt to violations and providing recommendations to other states. We conduct in-depth bilateral meetings with various foreign ministries, including those of France, Germany, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA, and convene other high-level meetings. We actively participate in and organise advocacy events. The most recent, held on 21 September, focused on human rights violations and avenues for accountability and was co-hosted by the USA and co-sponsored by France, Germany, Qatar and the UK.

I believe the international community should also provide substantial financial and logistical support to active Syrian CSOs that have played a significant role in the Syrian civil war and have, to some extent, replaced the state.

What has triggered recent protests across Syria?

Since early August, many regime-controlled areas of Syria have witnessed peaceful civil demonstrations. People took to the streets because they felt even more hopeless following Assad’s interview with Sky News Arabia on 9 August. He didn’t apologise nor did he express any willingness to change the way he’s ruling the country. Instead, he said that if he could go back to 2011, he would kill even more people than he did.

There are ongoing protests in areas of northern Syria that aren’t controlled by the regime. Protesters seek to hold the Syrian regime responsible for the worsening economic, social and political conditions. Their calls echo those of the 2011 Arab Spring: they demand an end to family rule and a transition to democracy, freedom of speech, the release of illegally detained people and accountability for perpetrators. Their major message is that Assad must go.

We have monitored and documented multiple vicious methods used by the regime’s security forces to suppress protests, including arrest, torture, enforced disappearances and prosecution of hundreds of protesters. The regime uses its media outlets to slander protesters or anyone criticising it as traitors or collaborators working with foreign entities. The Syrian regime has also attempted to stage counter-demonstrations with loyalists chanting pro-regime slogans and threatening anyone opposing the regime.

The original article was published on the civicus.org website.

Over the past ten years, an average of 84 civilians have been killed every day in direct connection to the war in Syria, according to UN Human Rights. By 2022, an estimated 306,887 civilians had been killed since the armed conflict began in the country. These staggering numbers reveal the brutal impact of the conflict on the lives of civilians.

Compiling such data takes a team of human rights and statistics experts. UN Human Rights monitors and reports on the human rights situation in many conflict-affected countries, seeking to highlight emerging human rights concerns and provide early warning analysis.

In many conflict-affected countries, UN Human Rights carries out civilian casualty recording, which means documenting the number and circumstances of direct conflict-related deaths. Casualty recording is the systematic collection of data on conflict-related deaths, which in addition to assessing the toll on civilian casualties, also makes it possible to identify human rights concerns, such as the impact of highly explosive weapons in urban areas, or the potential disproportionate character of certain attacks.

The challenges of collecting reliable data in conflict settings are numerous. In the ten years of the conflict in the Syrian Arab Republic, the UN Human Rights team worked with several civil society organizations on the ground, in carrying out this grueling work of documenting and reporting on deaths of civilians during active hostilities.

One of these organizations is the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR). It operates in dangerous environments, sometimes at personal risk to its members. It has nevertheless maintained consistency in the quality of its work, ensuring that individual casualties are recorded, and their stories are told.

“We monitored on a daily basis many areas and residential neighborhoods that were stormed by the parties to the conflict or were bombed, and we faced enormous security challenges having lost colleagues who were killed or arrested,” said Fadel Abdul Ghany, Founder and Executive Director of SNHR.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) faces a similar challenging reality.

“It is not easy for any organization to work under such dangerous and difficult circumstances and obstacles hindering the documentation and monitoring activities,” said Rami Abdurrahman, Founder and Director of SOHR. “However, we cooperate with each other in order to improve the future of Syrian people who have been grappling with destruction and hunger for years.”

Getting the data right
While every effort is made to ensure that information on civilian casualties is as comprehensive as possible, the team faces challenges to access this information because of active hostilities or the displacement of people. This means that the data they collect is not comprehensive and can’t cover all the incidents occurring in Syria.

To address these limitations, UN Human Rights’ Methodology, Education and Training Section (METS) in Geneva, Switzerland is leading a project that connects innovative statistical and data science techniques with human rights monitoring. UN Human Rights statisticians and data experts have partnered with statisticians from the Human Rights Data Analysis Group (HRDAG), in a project that integrates information collected from multiple sources, bringing additional value to these independent efforts.

“The information collected by these documentation groups is so important,” said
Megan Price, Executive Director, Human Rights Data Analysis Group (HRDAG)

To carry out the project, more than one million reports from eight sources were processed. The team ensured the relevance of each, identified possible duplicates, and then estimated the total number of civilian deaths using cutting-edge data science and statistical techniques, such as Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Multiple Systems Estimation (MSE). NLP is a method commonly applied to large bodies of unstructured text data. By applying it to the reports of the circumstances of the casualties, this data could be structured in a useful format for the analysis. By combining this data with the results of MSE, a statistical method for measuring the size of hard-to-count populations, reliable estimates on deaths that had remained undocumented could then be calculated.

The combination of casualty recording work with advanced statistical methods is powerful, creating an accurate picture of how violence changed over time, and how different groups, such as women and children, were affected. The estimates built on the individually documented information, but it also revealed the gaps in documentation by the sources used.

From the total estimate of 306,887 civilians killed between 1 March 2011 and 31 March 2021 in Syria due to the conflict, more than half of those deaths, or 163,537, were never documented by any group, according to UN Human Rights. This is significant because these results have a lasting impact that goes beyond statistics; they form part of the historical record of the war, according to the Office.

These results can be used to advance human rights objectives and inform policy and decision making, according to Radwan Ziadeh, the Executive Director of the Damascus Center for Human Rights Studies (DCHRS), an organization that provided data for this project.

“First, it can be used to ensure the right to truth, so victims and their families can get recognition by giving a human face to statistics,” Ziadeh said. “Second is its importance for justice and accountability, as the results can be used in the future in court proceedings.”

The Human Rights Council mandated UN Human Rights to produce a report on the impact of casualty recording on the promotion and protection of human rights is evidence of the growing interest and recognition of the value of casualty recording working.

“We are very fortunate to have this cooperation with UN Human Rights, and we hope to continue this engagement in the future,” Ziadeh said.

The project will continue its work by considering the estimation of indirect deaths, which are deaths resulting from a loss of access to essential goods and services in connection with the conflict, and by identifying new questions to further the analysis.

“The work on the ground continues, and new pieces of the impact of the conflict in the lives of Syrians are uncovered,” said Dimiter Chalev, Head of UN Human Rights Office for Syria. “Data becomes a new ally in the path to victim-centered and gender-responsive efforts to bring justice, accountability, and hopefully, sustainable peace.”

The article was first published by The United Nations on this link.

Fadel Abdul Ghany

At the start of this April, Lebanese authorities launched a still ongoing crackdown in areas of the country with a large Syrian population, which saw the detention and forced repatriation of dozens of Syrian refugees. It is an inescapable fact that those campaigns of raids, arrests and internationally outlawed forced refoulment constitute a blatant violation of Syrian refugees’ most fundamental rights, with many there unable to safely acquire official documents proving the legality of their presence in the country. Those seized in these raids have been targeted without mercy and repatriated to Syria. The Syrian Network of Human Rights (SNHR) has documented the refoulment of 168 Syrian refugees in Lebanon since the beginning of April, with almost one-third of those affected being women and children. All the victims have suffered numerous violations at the hands of both the Syrian and Lebanese armies.
The forced return of Syrian refugees by Lebanese authorities is an explicit violation of the Non-Refoulment Principle in international law, which prohibits states from repatriating refugees facing potential persecution, torture, or other serious human rights violations. The Syrian regime and its two principal allies, Iran and Russia, pose a serious threat to the lives of those forced to return to Syria. In this context, the actions of Hezbollah, which is part of the Lebanese government body, have led to the displacement of tens of thousands of Syrian refugees from Syria to Lebanon, particularly those from border areas such as al-Qusair, Madaya, and al-Qalamoun. The Lebanese group subsequently occupied the lands and seized the prosperities of those Syrians who had been displaced. How, then, can the Lebanese government rationalize the forced return of Syrian refugees after playing a part in occupying their lands and seizing their homes!?
The Syrian refugees’ right to non-refoulment should be a priority on the agendas of all upcoming Arab League meetings. The Syrian regime’s brutal mistreatment of both those who’ve remained in Syria and those returning to the country has remained unchanged since 2011, with the regime continues to perpetrate horrific violations against the Syrian people. It is an incontrovertible fact that any Syrian refugees forced to return will suffer the same persecution and criminal abuses that residents in Syria are already suffering, including arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearance, torture, lawlessness, and the encroachment of the regime’s security apparatus.
These latest crackdowns in Lebanon are, in fact, nothing new, with Syrian refugees in the country living in constant fear of such abuses and similar campaigns of intimidation and persecution for 12 years. The Lebanese judiciary has failed to launch any investigation at all into the torture, enforced disappearance, and deaths under torture of Syrian refugees in Lebanon. This shameful situation must change and justice must be attained for these victims. Lebanon, as well as Turkey, and Jordan, must comply with international law by respecting the Principle of Non-Refoulment since this is a binding customary law, even for those states that have not ratified the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.
The Lebanese government bears legal responsibility for the torture, killing, enforced disappearance, and all other violations perpetrated by the Syrian regime against any refugees forced to return, in addition, of course, to the direct responsibility of the Syrian regime itself for such violations. As long as the current regime remains in power, with its current and ruthless security apparatus intact, the refoulment of Syrian refugees will remain a blatant violation of international law and a mark of shame for any country whose government forcibly deports a vulnerable group and knowingly pushes them into life-threatening danger.
This is the reality for all displaced Syrians in the countries neighbouring Syria, who live in fear of the rulers’ potential restoration of relations with the Syrian regime, which would mean their being thrown back into the regime’s murderous and malign clutches. According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), approximately half the Syrian people are either refugees or internally displaced person (IDPs); they will not return voluntarily or be able to return safely to Syria without major political changes within the ruling system there taking place beforehand.
In its most recent report released in February 2023, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic (COI) confirmed that Syria remains unsafe for the return of refugees. Therefore, the international community is long overdue to take urgent action to protect the fundamental rights of refugees. It is our duty to ensure that refugees are not returned against their will to a country where they will surely face persecution, torture, and other grave and lethal human rights violations. The international community must act urgently to prevent more violations and ensure protection and support for refugees so they can build a safe and dignified life.
The article was first published in Arabic by The New Arab on this link.

Fadel Abdul Ghany, Executive Director of SNHR

The massive and continuous atrocities by the Syrian regime against its own people since the beginning of the popular uprising in March 2011 have been well-documented. Despite this, however, impunity is still the decisive outcome to date, notwithstanding the many initiatives by the Arab League and the international community to end violence and hold the regime accountable. Even worse, these efforts did not even have any effect in diminishing the violence, with the regime instead doubling down in its aggression and committing more monstrous violations against the Syrian people that constitute crimes against humanity.
The most recent report by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic (COI) confirms that the Syrian regime is still carrying out arbitrary arrests, enforced disappearances, and crimes of killing under torture. Meanwhile, SNHR’s database shows that approximately 96,000 Syrian citizens have been forcibly disappeared since March 2011, while at least 201,000 civilians’ lives have been lost, including 23,000 children. Moreover, the regime has dropped approximately 82,000 barrel bombs and used chemical weapons in 217 attacks. It is indisputable that the Syrian regime’s violations are the main and primary cause of the displacement of 14 million Syrians who have either been internally displaced or have sought refuge in foreign countries.
Despite all these inexcusable and damning indictments, however, some states are attempting to re-establish relations with the Syrian regime, regardless of its continued violence and its contempt for international law and human rights. Not only are these efforts blatant and grotesque insults to the Syrian people, but they can be viewed as a form of support for the regime’s crimes against humanity. Any such attempts will, undoubtedly, only offer further encouragement and impunity to the regime and other, similar murderous authoritarian regimes around the world. In addition, these efforts at rehabilitating the regime send a regrettably unprincipled and message to the international community, showing callous disregard for the millions of victims who have suffered or died at its handed.
Whatever the case, in light of the ongoing atrocities, those states that have, for whatever reasons, shown a willingness to restore relations with the Syrian regime must call on it to take immediate remedial action, including the release of political prisoners, disbanding extraordinary courts, and holding the perpetrators of violations against the Syrian people to account. Those states should also work towards actualizing a political resolution in Syria that would ensure the dignified and safe return of millions of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees.
As Martin Arnold once said, silence in the face of tyranny is a crime against humanity. We must not stand idly by while the regime continues its atrocities against its people. All states, including Arab ones, bear responsibility for respecting international law and human rights, and for holding the Syrian regime to account. The peoples of those states need to be aware of the crucial weight and importance of this issue and its impact on their future and the future of the region as a whole.

The article was first published by the Syria TV news site.

Brief
In its 21st issue, the peer-reviewed journal Qalamoun: Syrian Journal for Humanitarian Sciences published a study by Mr. Fadel Abdul Ghany, Executive Director of the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), entitled, ‘Should there be different standards on how UN sanctions are imposed depending on whether the sanctions are intended to enforce human rights or to maintain peace and security?’.
The study tackled the problematic aspects of the standards adopted by the UN in enforcing sanctions of different kinds, if those sanctions have been imposed for noble reasons, such as binding states to maintain human rights and preserve international peace and security. The study, which uses the Syrian conflict, ongoing since 2011, as a case study, concludes that while sanctions are indeed an instrument for deterrence and accountability, they alone cannot work effectively, as other instruments must to be utilized in tandem to make them effective.

The 10-page study discusses the legal framework for the powers of the Security Council according to the Charter of the UN and international law, noting that sanctions, no matter their forms or types, are a manifestation of political, legal, and human rights accountability that are meant to achieve various different goals. Sanctions have been used by states, whether individually or within alliances, for centuries. However, the establishment of the UN Charter in 1945 enshrined sanctions within a legal framework. According to the Charter, non-military sanctions are based on its Article 41 , while military sanctions are based on Article 42, provided that the Security Council has determined the “existence of a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression” where the purpose of sanctions is to “maintain or restore international peace and security” as per Article 39. The study stresses that the approval of sanctions is a political decision made within a legal framework, and that, as such, the two realms are deeply intertwined. Furthermore, the study shows that sanctions play a dual role – that is through being first and foremost a preemptive attempt to deter a threat, enabling the Security Council to act before the fact rather than waiting for the threatened action to happen, as well as providing a means of remedying a situation after violations have been perpetrated. In this context, the study recommends that sanction committees should be formed to monitor and observe the progress of sanctions.
The study also highlights that, in addition to the Security Council, the UN charter gives the UN General Assembly the power to discuss all UN matters and issue recommendations. The General Assembly has multiple powers in the context of preserving international peace and security; however; it cannot address any conflict that is being discussed by the Security Council. Only when the Security Council is unable to resolve a situation can the General Assembly intervene to find an alternative. The study refers to such a case that gave birth to the well-known resolution ‘Uniting for Peace’ of 1950.
Moreover, the UN Charter does not provide any specific definition for cases that could pose a threat to international peace and security which would prompt action by the Security Council. In the study’s view, this was a deliberate omission on the part of the charter’s founders in order to give the Security Council sole power to make the decision on when and if a case is deemed a threat to international and peace security, in light of how this fits the political interests of the Security Council’s permanent members. For instance, how is it possible that what is being done in Syria at the hands of the Syrian regime that has killed nearly 200,000 civilians and displaced nearly 13 million people, who’ve become IDPs or refugees in other countries, not to mention of its use of chemical weapons on multiple occasions, explicitly breaching Security Council resolutions, is not classified as a threat to international peace and security? It seems as if sanctions aim to preserve and protect peace, but not necessarily in a manner that is consistent with international law. In other words, sanctions are not always imposed for the purpose of preserving and protecting the law.
The study stresses that the Security Council is principally bound to consider international human rights law when designing sanctions in times of peace, and to consider the international humanitarian law when designing sanctions in times of armed conflicts. Additionally, the conduct by which the Security Council exercises its powers should be in line with the goals of the UN Charter that includes promoting human rights and the rules of the international law.
The study also tracks how the standards put in place for sanctions by the UN have changed with time. The study notes that the most prominent of these changes was the shift from comprehensive sanctions to smart sanctions, which are designed by analyzing every case separately based on the specific political, economic, and social conditions while taking into consideration the nature and severity of the violation. Smart sanctions, the study adds, put emphasis on improving the procedures for humanitarian exceptions within the sanction system, and targeting the active and relevant circles, influential individuals, specific outcomes, vital activities, and the institutions that violate human rights and international standards within the ruling authority. Finally, smart sanctions try to strike a balance between gains and suffering, and as such pay particular attention to humanitarian consequences. According to the study, smart sanctions are mainly concerned with flight and travel bans, arms and luxury goods embargo, and freezing the assets of members of the ruling regime and some of the involved state institutions.
The study notes that smart sanctions can achieve the same goals sought by comprehensive sanctions, while minimizing negative outcomes, particularly in relation to vulnerable groups such as women, children, and the elderly. It is difficult for totalitarian regimes to garner political and media momentum against sanctions that have been imposed against them. Rather, totalitarian regimes have found themselves forced to reconsider the feasibility of continuing with their violations of international law against the losses they are incurring. As such, the sanction system of the UN gains more credibility and effectiveness and restores its weight, while shielding it from accusations.

Finally, the study stresses that sanctions alone are not enough to preserve international peace and security and to punish perpetuators of human rights violations. While recognizing that it may be true that sanctions have yielded positive results in bringing about international peace and security and in ensuring respect for principal human rights in the past, acknowledging that sanctions are an effective and supporting instrument for peace, security, and human rights, and noting that smart sanctions adequately consider the principles of the international law, definitely making them a step in the right direction, they alone are insufficient in light of additional considerations that must be taken into account. One of the additional considerations highlighted by the study is the fact that the UN is a card in the hand of the Security Council which is dominated by the political and economic calculations of its five permanent member states which greatly neglects the interests of the peoples and states affected by human rights violations and conflict.

The study recommends that the approach of comprehensive sanctions should be dropped completely, in favor of smart sanctions against hostile totalitarian states. Furthermore, it suggests, each case should be examined separately and a study should be conducted into each case, while progress on achieving the goals proclaimed in each case should be monitored, as well as the degree to which certain sanctions are preserving and protecting international peace and security and human rights. Also, the smart sanctions system should include a preemptive, accurate, and justifiable specification of the entities and individuals they are targeting.
The study also recommends that a mechanism should be established beforehand to address the inescapable humanitarian outcomes from sanctions, no matter how precisely they may be implemented. Lastly, the study recommends that the UN provides aid for the states affected by targeting the state guilty of violations, as well as making a number of additional recommendations.
The study was published in the 21st issue of Qalamoun: Syrian Journal for Humanitarian Sciences

Download the full study

As the month of August dawns, it brings back traumatic memories for the Syrian people, who recall two of the horrific massacres committed by the Assad regime on the outskirts of the capital; one of these was inflicted through the regime’s bombing of the Eastern Ghouta and Mu’adamiya city in the western suburbs with chemical weapons in 2013, fatally asphyxiating more than 1,500 people were in the most horrific way; the other was the August 2012 massacre in Daraya city, in which Assad’s forces and shabiha used light and bladed weapons to slaughter more than 700 people after storming the city. Year after year, the question of why there has been no justice for these unspeakable crimes continues to blaze in the minds of the survivors and all the victims’ families.

Some Syrian organizations, including the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), continue working tirelessly to bring the Assad regime to justice legally and through recording crimes against human rights, documenting the violations the regime has committed for 11 years, and presenting this evidence to international bodies and the media.

In this interview, we host Mr. Fadel Abdul Ghany, the Syrian human rights defender and the director of SNHR, the most prominent Syrian human rights organization, discussing with him the prospects for the Syrian justice file and his organization’s efforts to prosecute the perpetrators and bring justice for the victims.

In June of 2011, Fadel Abdul Ghany founded the SNHR, which is concerned with documenting, analyzing, and issuing periodic reports on patterns of human rights violations in Syria. The SNHR has since established many partnerships with several United Nations bodies and international organizations, including Amnesty International (AI) and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), in addition to being a primary source for a number of foreign ministries around the world and a wide range of international media.

During the period of the revolution, the month of August witnessed some of the most horrific massacres, the best known of which were the chemical massacre in Eastern Ghouta and the Daraya massacre in Western Ghouta. Is there an integrated file you are working on to document those massacres?

We have tried to document as many massacres as possible, which is the SNHR’s main task, as this work differs from that of the international institutions and organizations that work on one or more incidents. As for the SNHR, since we are a national organization that seeks to monitor events on a daily basis and have documented hundreds of massacres in Syria, our documentation has not been limited to major massacres, but we also work on documenting smaller incidents, starting with attacks that kill five people or more with regard to massacres, in addition to documenting other violations.

We’ve published reports on dozens of massacres, which account for only a small part of the information we have, but due to the lack of logistical capacity, we haven’t published reports on all massacres, while we’ve gathered evidence on the largest massacres, documented them, and issued bulletins on them. Most of these massacres are documented on the basis of the date, numbers of victims, and the geographical area in which they occurred, along with collecting the available visual materials in addition to other details. Thus, we can provide a picture of what took place that helps in compensation later, which is supposed to start (if it starts) from the worst affected areas.

We also have a great responsibility to document the violations of other parties, such as the opposition forces and the Kurdish forces, because they originally came out against the brutal regime that committed various violations against the people, and it was hoped that these parties would not violate human rights. However, we at the SNHR distinguish between the parties, because It is misleading to say that all parties committed violations, and stop at that; this formula is demagogic rhetoric.

The parties are not equal in terms of committing violations, as by far the greatest part of all the violations committed have been perpetrated by the main culprit, the Syrian regime, which remained for a long time at the beginning the sole perpetrator of violations, while there were no factions or military formations. In addition to this point, the regime also used the massive power of its military and security forces to commit violations and massacres.

This does not mean failing to condemn the transgressions of the other parties, as each violation is condemned in itself, but we must put things in perspective and shed light on the root of the problem.

You talked about publishing reports, how often are they issued?

For 10 years, we have issued a daily death toll of victims and a record of violations such as arrests and abductions, in addition to issuing monthly reports on what is happening in the country, and then we follow that with a comprehensive annual report showing statistics on violations and victims, while in March of each year, we issue a comprehensive report on the previous years starting from 2011.

In conjunction with the foregoing, there are reports issued in real time, addressing other types of violations that document individual cases or the bombing of hospitals and schools or forced displacement, or even the issue of barrel bombs.

What about the chemical massacres?

Chemical weapons are prohibited internationally, and the Syrian regime is the only state party that used this weapon since the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1996. We did not expect the regime to dare to use it against its own people. We have issued more than 40 reports on the regime’s use of chemical weapons.

We documented the chemical attacks according to the governorates in which they were used, the number of times they were used, the number of casualties resulting, the type of munitions in which they were contained, and the party that carried out the attack.

It should be noted that the Syrian regime and ISIS are the only parties that carried out chemical weapons attacks (222 attacks in total), as the regime used this weapon 217 times while ISIS used it 5 times. We are in the process of issuing permanent reports on these cases and commenting on statements from international organizations concerned with this issue.

We also draw the attention of the international community on every anniversary of the major chemical weapons massacres that took place, such as the massacres of Eastern Ghouta and Khan Sheikhoun. It must be noted here that although chemical weapons did not kill the largest number of Syrians, this is a weapon of particular fear and terrorism because it kills by suffocating all people without age discrimination. Moreover, it is a prohibited weapon under three Security Council resolutions.

Chemical weapons are weapons of mass destruction. For example, in Iraq, there was simply suspicion of possession of weapons of mass destruction and their manufacture by Saddam Hussein’s regime, at that time, the international community intervened without referring to the Security Council. In Syria, it has been proven by conclusive evidence from international organizations that the Assad regime used these weapons against its people repeatedly, but we did not see any deterrence against the Syrian regime to hold it accountable for this.

Is there a human rights movement against the perpetrators of those massacres in international forums? Why is the prosecution mostly limited to lower-ranking soldiers and military individuals? Why don’t the trials extend to major influential figures such as Bashar al Assad, his family, and his assistants?

In our reports, we name the individuals involved in these massacres to expose them, while we target individuals because it is a form of accountability, and we have also published reports on the most prominent officers and those responsible for the crimes.

As for the second part of the question, this is because these trials hold accountable those who are in the territories of the countries where these legal procedures are established, while the senior officials reside in Syria and do not travel to those countries; accountability requires arrest and trial until a court ruling is issued against the defendants.

Where has the issue of trials taking place in Europe against the perpetrators of war crimes reached, and is it possible to build on them in larger actions later on, or is the matter more complicated?

No, it is not complicated. People have the right to understand what is going on, but there is a basic reason behind this matter, which is that some of those who worked in these trials pushed their followers to believe that great and numerous results are expected from them; however, their fundamental objective is simply to lay a small stepping stone along the path of justice. If the workers in this field make clear to the people what the real expected results are, then there will be fewer questions and less waiting for major results.

Of course, we do not say that these trials are not important, are not a form of accountability, or will not contribute to exposing the regime, but such talk has a limited ceiling in the sense that this path will not reach the Syrian regime’s officers and senior officials, nor will it stop torture in prisons, nor will it prevent the regime from using internationally prohibited weapons. We need a balanced discourse in order not to dash the hopes of Syrians who are waiting for their rights to be met.

Institutions must be honest, transparent, and frank, and matters should not be exaggerated by those working on certain issues. We as organizations do not have great power, but we are doing as much as possible on the path of justice.

Syrian activists talk about the trials taking place in Europe as “selective justice”, how do you see the situation?

There is some truth in this response; yes, it is selective because not all major criminals are in countries that have jurisdiction, and they really select those on their soil, and it depends on whether or not there is evidence against these individuals.

These details were not made clear to the Syrian people, which led to distortion and disruption of the process at times. Let us be frank, there are some people at the fore who distorted the general meaning of the case, despite its importance, vitality, and the necessity of its continuation. We are talking here about the process of trials and not the human rights field as a whole.

Let’s talk about the SNHR – what are the mechanisms you follow? And how do you evaluate your role in presenting the picture to the world about what is happening in Syria?

We need to cooperate with other institutions to integrate because we work on human rights issues and not on criminal issues. This needs concerted efforts with institutions working with the same files in order to build a legal case.

We have also made efforts with our available capabilities, and we hope that we have contributed to conveying the suffering and rights violations against Syrians to the concerned countries and organizations. The SNHR has tried its best, and has become a primary source on the human rights situation in Syria for the U.S. Department of State, the German Foreign Ministry, the French, the UK, Dutch, and Danish Foreign Ministries, as well as for a number of UN bodies.

Several UN agencies rely on the SNHR’s data, with the SNHR becoming a primary source for data on the violations documented in Syria for bodies such as the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR); the Independent International Commission of Inquiry (UN-COI); the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (UN-IIIM); the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA); the Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism (MRM) on Grave Violations Against Children in situations of Armed Conflict, led by UNICEF; the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW); the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID); and a number of special rapporteurs appointed by the Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

We hope that we have reflected the reality, but have we made a change? This matter is not in our hands. We have tried to describe what we have recorded with as much skill as possible, and we always hope that we will be successful in providing the best for our people and our country, because Syria and the Syrian people deserve effort and sympathy, and they need hundreds of institutions in order to deliver their case and document their suffering.

The Syrian people now know the extent of the Russian campaign against Syrian organizations, including the SNHR and the White Helmets, to weaken their credibility. How do you face this ongoing campaign that is trying to weaken you? Is there coordination with other Syrian organizations?

Confronting the Russian campaign is done by sticking to and raising the methodological standards and steadily proceeding on this path, so as to avoid any defect in the documentation of the incidents that we are working on. Russia cannot refute or falsify any incident that we have recorded and documented, since we are not politicians and we do not come up with random statistics; to this day, Russia has not been able to contradict what we have published, and this is the source of our strength.

The Russian media outlets describe the SNHR as being supported by the West and biased! They can say whatever they want without providing any proof. We are not interested in responding to everyone who accuses us and addresses us. We respond through our work and accept professional criticism, and we have the courage to apologize for mistakes if any.

We also have communication with other Syrian organizations for coordination, and there are continuous meetings with the Civil Defense organization, the ‘White Helmets’, and there is also coordination between us, in addition to partnership and cooperation for years. At the same time, we have memoranda of understanding with several local and international organizations.

There is always a recurring question, is there any point in human rights work? Especially since the days are passing and there has been no breakthrough on the human rights level against the regime?

We are doing what we have to do, but the change is not in our hands, but in the hands of the politicians, and we hold them responsible. Our task is to say that we [the Syrian people] are not doing well, we are still being bombed and displaced, and the regime is still in place. As for achieving change, this is out of our control, but we seek to attain protection for civilians. If these needs are not fulfilled, this does not mean that the basis is not correct, but there is a certain ceiling as a result of the complexities of the international situation.

What is the importance of human rights work in light of countries’ drawing back from looking at the Syrian issue as a hot crisis, and dealing with the Assad regime as a fait accompli, regardless of everything that happened?

For this, the human rights issue must be prioritized and we must not despair. We will certainly not allow them to restore their relationship with the regime. As for dealing with the Syrian regime, it has become a fait accompli. It is a phrase that came out from the regime itself to promote, and some are now adopting this phrase.

Do you think that your human rights work and exposing Bashar al Assad’s violations are capable of limiting normalization with his regime?

Yes, I think they are to a large extent. The human rights movement succeeded in certain areas in playing this role. As a result, many countries that were far from the Syrian issue and voted for the regime in international forums, have changed their positions after learning about the extent of violations committed by the regime.

It must be noted that the countries that support the regime are basically dictatorships, whose numbers do not exceed 10, in addition to being on the lowest scale in terms of human rights, such as Russia and China, which normally support Assad.

The original article was published on the Noon Post website.

UN humanitarian aid trucks enter northwest Syria through the Bab al-Hawa border crossing with Turkey on June 1, 2021. © 2021 Associated Press

Louis Charbonneau
United Nations Director at Human Rights Watch

In less than two weeks, the 15 members of the United Nations Security Council will make a decision that affects the lives of more than 4.1 million people in northwestern Syria: whether to allow the UN and its partners to continue providing lifesaving humanitarian aid to Syria from across its border with Turkey.

More than ten years of conflict have fragmented Syria, decimating its infrastructure and social services in ways that harm people’s rights. Together with its crumbling economy, this has left millions of people reliant on aid. UN Aid Chief Martin Griffiths told Security Council members last week that cross-border aid must continue, and that the number of Syrians in need is higher today than at any point during the war, which has stretched on for more than a decade. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres concurred, adding, “People are living on the brink, no longer able to cope.”

In 2020, Russia, a permanent member of the Security Council with veto power, forced the Council to shut down three of the four previously authorized border crossings, entirely cutting off UN cross-border aid for Syria’s northeast and making it more difficult to distribute aid in the northwest. Only the Bab al-Hawa border crossing, between Syria’s Idlib governorate and Turkey’s Hatay Province, remains open.

The Syrian government has long obstructed what is known as cross-line aid, assistance that moves across front lines from government-held parts of the country into non-government-controlled territory. Over the past year, the UN has only managed to send five convoys from government-controlled areas into northwest Syria with nutrition, health, food, and education supplies, a drop in the ocean compared to the staggering number of Syrians needing humanitarian assistance to survive.

Security Council members should vote to keep open the Bab al-Hawa border crossing, a lifeline to civilians in northwest Syria, for at least another year. As the leaders of 32 humanitarian organizations warned earlier this month, shutting it down would be devastating. In addition to keeping this crossing open, on July 7, Security Council members should also consider expanding humanitarian access by authorizing additional crossings that would more effectively service Syrians in other areas, as they desperately need assistance.

The UN should act decisively to meet this need. The lives of Syrian men, women, and children depend on it.

The original article was published on the Human Rights Watch website

Dozens of Syrians wait at the al-Ra’is Bridge in Damascus for relatives they hope would be among those released from prison, May 3, 2022. © 2022 AP Photo/Omar Sanadiki

Maya Ghazi
A pseudonym used to protect the identity of a Human Rights Watch staff member

On April 30, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad granted a general amnesty for “Syrian citizens detained on ‘terrorism-related’ crimes,’” except for crimes that resulted in death. The Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR) has documented the release of 193 detainees since May 1, including seven who were children at the time of their arrest. Those released have spent from two to eight years in detention.

While the release of detainees from the Syrian government’s horrific dungeons is good news, no information has been provided about the many others who remain locked away. Images released over the last few days show masses of people gathered under al-Ra’is Bridge in Damascus, anxiously awaiting the potential arrival of their loved ones. Many of these families had seen names of their relatives on lists posted on social media, while others showed up hoping to see a recognizable face.

The head of Syria’s Counterterrorism Court, Zahera al-Bashmani, later confirmed that these lists were fake and described the families gathering as “strange.” She said the amnesties will be granted on a case-by-case basis, the government will not provide any comprehensive lists nor designate specific release locations, and the releases will happen in “waves.”

The chaos around these limited releases has been heartbreaking for the many families who have unsuccessfully searched for information on detained relatives for years. Tens of thousands remain detained or forcibly disappeared by the government.

The process of Syrian authorities granting amnesty to some detainees also implies that there were criminal charges and fair trials that resulted in convictions. In reality, little is known about the detainees after their arrest and where the process is clear, it is riddled with due process concerns. Syria’s detention system is a “torture archipelago” where authorities have killed or allowed detainees to die under torture while many others continue to suffer in abhorrent prison conditions.

Families interviewed pleaded to just be given an answer whether to keep hoping for their loved ones’ return. Many who have not been able to locate their relatives have taken to social media to post pictures and information, in hopes they could be identified and reconnected. Even as Syrian authorities produce a modicum of good news, they continue to punish those living under their despotic rule.

The original article was published on the Human Rights Watch website

Russian forces invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, attacking an independent, sovereign state and its democratically elected government. This invasion brought Syrians back to September 30, 2015, when Russian war forces began bombing Syrian territory, lining up alongside their ally, the Syrian regime. I think both interventions are illegal, although there are certainly differences. In Syria, there is an internal armed conflict with a regime that accepts only individual family rule and, in order to stay in power, committed atrocious violations that constitute crimes against humanity. As for the Ukrainian case, we are facing an international armed conflict, in addition to many other differences on the geopolitics, economics, and social levels.
From a human rights standpoint, the protection of civilians and victims should be the norm, regardless of their religion, race, and location. The world’s states and the UN Security Council must take all possible measures to protect civilians from crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide, as stipulated in the Geneva Conventions for which states must ensure respect, as well as in many international human rights law treaties. From this aspect, we, as Syrians, have the right to compare the West’s response to the brutal Russian bombing of Ukraine with the West’s response to the brutal Russian bombing, which is even more vicious and violent, of Syria.
Over the years, Russia has committed thousands of human rights violations in Syria, including killings as a result of indiscriminate bombing, targeting vital facilities, including medical centers and Civil Defense centers, destroying entire neighborhoods, and displacing hundreds of thousands of Syrians. Russian violations in Syria have been documented by many UN agencies and international human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, as well as by the Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR), whose documentation is distinguished by having the data on the victims who were killed, and by cumulatively recording the record of the centers that were bombed; in its latest annual report, which was issued on September 30, 2021, marking the sixth anniversary of the Russian intervention in Syria, SNHR revealed that Russian forces have killed 6,910 civilians, including 2,030 children and 974 women (adult female), since Russia’s military intervention in Syria on September 30, 2015, up to September 30, 2021, and committed at least 357 massacres. The report also documented Russian forces killing of 70 medical personnel, including 12 women, in addition to killing 44 Civil Defense personnel during the same period. The report also documented the deaths of 24 media workers, all of whom were killed in the governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, and recorded at least 1,231 attacks on vital civilian facilities, including 222 on schools, 207 on medical facilities, and 60 on markets, and at least 237 cluster munition attacks, in addition to at least 125 incendiary weapon attacks, with Russian attacks contributing to the forced displacement of hundreds of thousands of Syrians.
I, as a Syrian, do not wish anyone in the world to suffer from the barbaric Russian or Assadist attacks, with Russia testing various types of weapons with our flesh and blood. We hope that the West will be able to deter Russia in Ukraine, otherwise, Russia will consider this a green light and continue to escalate its level of brutality until reaching that of its own practices in Syria. Therefore, I think that the actions taken by the West in order to deter Russia in Ukraine are excellent steps in the right direction, and they are greatly appreciated, in addition to the fact that they are generally at the heart of international law in order to protect civilians and deter aggression against them.

Having said this, as a Syrian, I cannot help but wonder, why did the West take no such serious steps to punish Russia for its killing and bombing of my country, Syria? Why hasn’t it imposed any sanctions on Russia for its brutal military intervention in Syria? I know that there are answers from the school of foreign policy realism, but, as a human rights defender, I speak from the perspective of the liberal school, and from our approach as victims, not as politicians, and I’m deeply sorry that Syria has been left an open field for Russia, while the latter has paid no tangible price, which is why the vast majority of Russian research centers consider Russia’s military intervention in Syria to be a clear victory and a resounding success for Russian foreign policy. I believe that the West’s inaction in failing to punish Russia and hold it accountable for its brutal crimes in Syria encouraged it to attack Ukraine.

Western support for Ukraine has not been limited to the economic level, including the Swift system and freezing the Russian Central Bank’s overseas assets. Instead, Western support included opening a file at the United Nations General Assembly and demanding that Russia be deterred, as a party to the conflict, from using its veto. Regarding the latter point, I have spoken dozens of times about all the occasions on which Russia used its veto in Syria – 16 in all – but there has been no follow-up or interest. There has also been a demand for invocation of the principle of ‘Uniting for Peace’ in Ukraine, a principle that Syrians have demanded be invoked hundreds of times in Syria. While this article does not provide comparisons for all or even most of the issues in the two cases, I think the examples that have been cited are sufficient to give a good picture of the extent of the double standards involved, while reiterating that we support the steps taken in Ukraine, which are the right of the Ukrainian people.

Syrians hope that the West will return to support our cause, that sanctions will be imposed on Russia for its military intervention in Syria, that the principle of ‘Uniting for Peace’ will be implemented, and that Russia will be prosecuted for the atrocious violations it has committed in Syria, which constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity, through the principle of universal jurisdiction, and in European domestic criminal courts, and that Russia will be deterred from using its veto again regarding Syria, in particular against humanitarian aid delivery.
The West’s success in reining in Russia in Syria means a major step on the way to resolving the Syrian conflict, because this greatly undermines the Syrian regime’s main ally, forcing it to submit to and abide by the terms of negotiations. Moreover, these serious steps towards Russia constitute a kind of accountability for the Russian perpetrators of violations, a good step on the path to accountability.

The article was published on Syria TV website.

Syrian women hold banners outside the court in Koblenz, Germany, after it convicted a former Syrian secret police officer of crimes against humanity for having overseen abuse of detainees at a jail near Damascus, Syria, January 13, 2022. © 2022 AP Photo/Martin Meissner

Sara Kayyali,
Syria Researcher Middle East and North Africa Division

This is not an April Fools’ joke. Syria, where torture is routine and pervasive, has passed a law criminalizing the practice. In an announcement that might have appeared as satire, the Syrian State News Agency (SANA) reported that the Syrian government passed an anti-torture law on March 30, 2022.

The law criminalizes torture and assigns a penalty of at least three years’ imprisonment, and up to the death penalty where the torture results in death or involves rape. It also prohibits any authority from ordering the torture of anyone, and states that evidence gathered through torture is invalid.

It is hard to take something like this seriously, given how pervasive the use of torture is by Syrian state authorities. As Human Rights Watch and others have extensively documented, Syria has arbitrarily detained and tortured tens of thousands of people in what amount to crimes against humanity.

In August 2013, a military defector code-named Caesar smuggled 53,275 photographs out of Syria. The photos provide irrefutable evidence of widespread torture, starvation, beatings, and disease in Syrian government detention facilities.

Yet, despite widespread condemnation, the Syrian government has done little if anything to stem the use of torture by its agents.

While it is hard to attribute intent to a government defined by arbitrariness, the passage of the law could be a response to ongoing efforts to prosecute the use of torture by Syria officials in the conflict, including an effort by some states to hold the Syrian government accountable for torture under the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

The government needs to do far more than pass a law to show that it is reforming. It should start by holding accountable those responsible for torture over the past decade; by releasing all those arbitrarily detained in official and unofficial detention facilities, and by seriously contributing to an international and independent effort to determine and reveal the fate of the thousands who have been disappeared.
Only then will we commend the move.

The original article was published on the Human Rights Watch website