As Syria’s National Investigation Committee formally acknowledged the scale of atrocities committed in the coastal region, doubts remain over the seriousness of accountability and transparency. To date, the full report has not been released, the ranks or positions of suspects have not been disclosed, and the role of senior military and civilian leaders has not been clearly addressed under the principle of “command responsibility”. This omission leaves a dangerous gap and raises fears that responsibility may be limited to lower-ranking perpetrators, shielding those at the top.
Legal experts stress that the problem lies not only in the absence of written orders but in the failure of officials to prevent or halt violations, despite their capacity to mobilise troops and coordinate operations on a wide scale. The inability – or unwillingness – of the leadership to stop killings, looting, and mass arrests reflects clear dereliction of duty and a lack of political will. This, they argue, created an environment where crimes continued unchecked, reinforcing a sense of impunity.
Hiba Zayadin, senior researcher at Human Rights Watch, told 963+ that while the committee’s recognition of the atrocities and the death toll marks an important step, it remains inadequate without genuine transparency.
“The full report has not yet been published, the identities and ranks of suspects remain undisclosed, and the role of senior leadership under the principle of responsibility has not been addressed. This opens the door to conflicts of interest and to easing accountability for those at the top,” she explained.
Zayadin emphasised that the key recommendations include publication of the full report with guarantees for witness protection, serious investigations into the role of senior civilian and military leaders and granting UN bodies meaningful access to Syria. She underlined the urgent need to reform the security sector through unifying command chains under civilian oversight, vetting commanders and personnel, isolating abusive units, and enforcing a strict military code of conduct. Alongside this, evidence preservation and fair, comprehensive reparations for victims are essential.
Read also: Transitional Syria: Islamic Elites vs. Secular Other
She added that any transitional justice plan must include meaningful participation of victims and civil society, with a clear timeline and an independent mechanism to monitor progress and publish regular reports.
For Bassem al-Ahmad, executive director of Syrians for Truth and Justice, the responsibility for these crimes cannot be confined to field-level perpetrators. Speaking to +963, he stated that senior military and civilian officials bear direct responsibility.
“The absence of written orders does not absolve the leadership of responsibility, especially for operations on this scale, which involved direct coordination between the ministries of defence and interior,” he explained.
According to al-Ahmad, the transitional authorities’ investigative committee sought to restrict blame to field operatives, avoiding meaningful accountability or naming those truly responsible.
He pointed out that the Ministry of Defence had the ability to mobilise tens of thousands of fighters, determine deployment areas, and sustain operations over several days, which proves the central role of top-level leadership. The core issue, he argued, is not only who gave the orders but the lack of will or action from senior officials to stop the killings, looting, and arbitrary arrests. This, he said, shows negligence and weak leadership, opening the door for further atrocities and a culture of impunity.
The joint report released by Human Rights Watch, Syrians for Truth and Justice, and the Syrian Archive entitled “You Are Alawite: Identity-Based Killing During Syria’s Transition” is based on over 100 interviews with survivors, eyewitnesses, fighters, and journalists, as well as satellite imagery and verified audio-visual material. It documents widespread violations across more than 24 towns, villages, and neighbourhoods, including summary executions, raids, looting, arson, and identity-based arrests. Some fighters admitted civilians were targeted solely for being Alawite, while witnesses reported similar patterns of sectarian violence already present weeks earlier in Homs and rural Hama.
In July, the Syrian National Investigation Committee released a summary of its final report, confirming 1,426 deaths and the referral of 298 suspects to court. While this marked a shift from previous blanket denials, the report failed to identify command responsibility or address institutional shortcomings.
Jelnar Ahmad, director of the Syrian Archive programme in MNEMONIC, stressed that the coastal atrocities cannot be viewed as a single episode limited to one week in March. Instead, they reflect a broader, systematic pattern of abuse requiring structural and transparent remedies. Transitional justice in Syria, she argued, cannot be achieved without confronting leadership responsibility for these crimes.
In conclusion, the joint report makes clear that the atrocities in Syria’s coastal region were not an isolated incident, but a planned, sectarian-driven campaign organised at the leadership level. While the national committee has acknowledged part of the crimes, the lack of transparency – highlighted by Zayadin – and leadership failures – pointed out by al-Ahmad – remain the greatest obstacles to any meaningful path toward justice and reconciliation in Syria.
