A Syrian court sentenced former President Bashar al-Assad and eight other former officials to death in absentia on Tuesday, convicting them of murder, torture, and crimes against humanity committed during the country’s nearly 14-year civil war. The verdict marks the conclusion of the first trial related to the conflict conducted within Syria since Assad’s ouster in December 2024.
Among those sentenced were Maher al-Assad, Bashar al-Assad’s brother and commander of an elite army unit implicated in government attacks against opposition forces, and Atef Najib, the former political security chief in the southern province of Daraa. Najib was the sole defendant present during the trial and was handed a death sentence. He retains the right to appeal within 30 days, while the others do not, having declined to appear in court, according to Radeef Mustafa, director of the accountability department at the National Commission for Transitional Justice.
After the fall of the Assad government, Bashar al-Assad, his brother Maher, and several other officials fled to Russia, which granted them asylum. Syrian authorities have formally requested their extradition, although Russian officials are unlikely to comply.
The interim government established by the rebels who overthrew Assad has sought to address accountability for wartime abuses. Still, public frustration has mounted over the perceived slow progress and limited scope of transitional justice efforts. Experts caution that such processes require time to establish credible legal frameworks and gather evidence.
Following the verdict announcement in Damascus, families of victims gathered outside the courthouse, chanting slogans honoring those killed during the war. Many participants marched through city streets while others distributed sweets in celebration.
The charges against Atef Najib centered on his role in suppressing protests in Daraa at the onset of the 2011 uprising. After teenagers painted anti-government graffiti, Najib ordered their arrest and alleged torture, actions that precipitated wider demonstrations and government crackdowns involving lethal force.
Last year, the National Commission for Transitional Justice was formed to oversee prosecution of war-related human rights abuses. Abdul Basit Abdul Latif, head of the commission, described the verdict against Najib as a significant milestone in Syria’s pursuit of justice. He noted that decisions about retaining the death penalty would ultimately rest with Parliament amid pending transitional justice legislation.
Human rights observers acknowledged the symbolic importance of the convictions but emphasized the need for transparency regarding the court’s evidentiary standards. Fadel Abdul Ghany, director of the Syrian Network for Human Rights, said the trial broke with Syria’s history of impunity by holding senior regime members accountable domestically and allowing victims to participate. However, he highlighted the absence of an independent judiciary and comprehensive legal mechanisms for such cases as ongoing challenges.
Hiba Zayadin, a senior researcher at Human Rights Watch, noted that the court relied heavily on witness testimony due to the scarcity of documentary evidence, a common issue given the destruction and inaccessibility of records over the conflict’s duration. She underscored that the trial’s strength will depend on the reliability of this testimony and the court’s ability to link individual defendants to specific crimes.
The full written verdict, reportedly exceeding 300 pages, has not yet been released, leaving a detailed assessment of the court’s reasoning and evidence pending.