The Media Line: Extradition Arrest Warrant for Bashar Assad Shows Syrian Courts’ Accountability, but Can It Be Enforced?

Audio By Carbonatix

Enlarge

Extradition Arrest Warrant for Bashar Assad Shows Syrian Courts’ Accountability, but Can It Be Enforced?   

By Rizik Alabi/The Media Line  

The Syrian Ministry of Justice, through the Seventh Investigative Court in Damascus, has issued an absentee arrest warrant for former President Bashar Assad, who reportedly fled to Russia after being removed from power.  

The warrant, formally stamped and signed by the investigative judge, marks a significant judicial and political development that reflects deep shifts in Syria’s balance of power.  

The warrant lists personal information about the former president, including his place of birth and residence, along with the charges brought against him under specific articles of Syrian law. It also instructs security and military agencies to carry out the arrest order and deliver him to the competent authorities for prosecution once in custody.  

Under Syrian law, absentee arrest warrants are formal judicial measures issued against defendants who cannot be summoned or who refuse to appear before the court.  

Issuing such a warrant against a former president — a figure still controversial at home and abroad — carries exceptional weight. According to Article 114 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, these warrants are carried out within Syrian territory and documented in official records. This raises questions about their practical enforceability when the wanted individual is outside the country, as in Assad’s case while residing in Russia.  

Since the start of widespread protests in 2011, Bashar Assad’s name has been tied to numerous violations and international accusations, including the excessive use of force against demonstrators and the widespread detention and torture of prisoners in Syria.  

In recent years, the United States and the European Union have imposed broad sanctions on the Syrian regime and its officials. Assad, however, remained in power until his sudden ouster late last year, when opposition forces advanced and captured Damascus.  

The arrest warrant opens a new chapter in addressing Assad’s legacy, serving as a symbolic step toward internal accountability after more than a decade of war. It also signals an attempt by Syrian state institutions to rebuild legitimacy through the judiciary at a time when the country faces severe economic and social pressures.  

The move is likely to spark debate both domestically and internationally. Some may view it as a victory for justice and a clear message that no one is above the law, while others may see it more as a political maneuver than a genuine judicial process, particularly given Assad’s presence in Russia, which is unlikely to extradite its former ally.  

The new Syrian government may view the warrant as both legal and moral support for its ongoing calls to prosecute Assad for crimes committed during the war years. The international community, meanwhile, is expected to respond cautiously, waiting to see how seriously Syrian authorities pursue the case and implement it in practice.  

Although enforcing the warrant under current conditions is unlikely, its significance lies in its symbolism and what it reveals about shifting domestic power dynamics. It also sends a signal that the Assad file remains open and that the pursuit of justice, even if delayed, may eventually advance.  

As Syria continues to grapple with severe economic crises and the challenges of reconstruction, the issuance of this warrant adds a new dimension to the political landscape, where transitional justice intersects with the broader effort to rebuild the state.