In decisive moments in a nation’s history, when an old regime collapses and gives way to a new political order, one question becomes unavoidable: how to build an independent judicial system that embodies the principles of justice and helps heal a divided society.
History shows that rebuilding the judiciary after revolutions or wars is not just a matter of reorganizing institutions. It is a foundational act that redefines the state itself, its values, and the very idea of citizenship, paving the way for a more stable and fair future.
Today, Syria, on the threshold of what some scholars call the “Fourth Republic” and more than eight decades after independence, faces a critical test: can it institutionalize an effective, independent judiciary, overcome its deep structural weaknesses, and finally break the cycle of prolonged crises?
To succeed, the country must model a justice system that reflects Syrians’ aspirations for freedom and fairness, forming the backbone of a new social contract, without demanding further sacrifice from a population already exhausted by conflict.
Judicial Reform: A Cornerstone of Transition
Tariq Wutfa, a legal researcher at Paradigm MENA, believes judicial reform is one of the most urgent needs of Syria’s transitional period. In his view, no political transition can succeed without a strong, independent judicial authority.
Speaking to +963, Wutfa explained that Syria’s judiciary suffers from long-standing problems inherited from the previous regime; corruption, bureaucracy, and a lack of skilled personnel. These issues have been compounded by the mass exodus of judges, politically motivated dismissals, and the absence of training in international human rights standards or transitional justice mechanisms.
Read also: How Failure in Transitional Justice Fuels Division in Syria
He stresses that change is possible if Syria draws on global experiences, pointing out that judicial subordination to the executive deepened under the constitutional declaration, which gave President Ahmed Al-Sharaa the power to appoint members of the Supreme Constitutional Court, without creating an independent judicial council or ensuring safeguards for judicial independence.
According to Wutfa, building a judiciary capable of handling transitional justice is achievable; if backed by a package of constitutional and legislative reforms in four key areas:
- Constitutional reform to guarantee judicial independence, create a competent and autonomous constitutional court, and redefine transitional justice, especially by amending Article 49(3), which limits non-retroactivity to certain crimes in a way that risks narrowing justice to regime crimes only.
- Capacity-building programs to reintegrate dismissed or defected judges, establish sustainable recruitment and training systems, and set up long-term partnerships with regional and international judicial bodies.
- Adapting global models from countries like Tunisia, Morocco, and South Africa to Syria’s legal culture and sectarian dynamics, using Arabic-language resources and tailored training methods.
- Participatory lawmaking through a representative legislative council that uses consensus or a high majority to pass critical justice-related laws, while ensuring protection from warlord and militia intimidation.
He also highlights the need for new bar association elections, noting that the current administration appointed its own councils, undermining the profession’s independence.
For Wutfa, success will depend on building a judiciary that is independent, competent, and transparent; one that guarantees justice and equal rights for all Syrians without exception.
The Reform Journey
For governance expert Zaidoun Al-Zoubi, Syria’s path to reform must be informed by other nations’ experiences. Speaking to +963, he warns against limiting South Africa’s example to judicial reforms alone, emphasizing its broader transitional justice process as the country’s true achievement.
He explains that one of South Africa’s major challenges was the racial imbalance within the judiciary, where most judges were white despite the Black majority population. Even decades later, whites still make up about half of the judiciary, showing how deeply ingrained such imbalances can be.
South Africa’s leaders chose gradual reform over mass dismissals, avoiding the shock and instability that sudden purges can cause. This, Al-Zoubi says, is a crucial lesson for Syria: judicial reform is not about quick fixes or radical overnight changes but about patient, steady progress.
He also reminds that transitional justice is not limited to trials. It includes victim compensation, public acknowledgment of wrongdoing, memorialization, and most importantly a clear, comprehensive strategy for achieving justice, something Syria currently lacks.
Read also: Syrian Judiciary Struggles Between Chaos and Political Control
Justice Without Chaos
Human rights lawyer Abdul Karim Al-Thalji underscores the difficulty of implementing transitional justice without reigniting tensions. He stresses the need to balance holding perpetrators accountable with preserving state institutions and stability.
Many in Syria’s judiciary, he notes, were part of the old system. Purging them wholesale could collapse the entire legal apparatus. Instead, he points to recent steps in “New Syria” such as the creation of a Transitional Justice Commission and a Missing Persons Authority; indicators that the process has already begun.
The final piece, he says, is launching a legislative council empowered to pass laws and activate courts, enabling the prosecution of criminals, redress for victims, and memorialization of the past. These measures are key to preventing future abuses by reforming both the security and judicial sectors, thus strengthening social cohesion.
As Al-Thalji concludes: “There can be no civil peace and no justice without holding criminals accountable.”
Drawing on examples like Rwanda and South Africa, he urges Syria to document crimes meticulously, pursue high-level perpetrators, and foster national reconciliation; all while keeping state institutions functional.
Ultimately, the judiciary will be at the heart of Syria’s transitional justice. Achieving accountability without creating a legal vacuum is the surest way to restore public trust and build the New Syria as a state of law, justice, and citizenship.
