More than thirty years after Syria passed Law No. 8 of 1994, which bans the collection and operation of money from the public, the General Assembly of the Court of Cassation has finally settled a long-standing legal debate: in the context of this law, the term “public” refers to ten people or more.
The law, which criminalises collecting money from the public, investing it and distributing profits, had long divided Syrian courts. Some judges argued that “public” begins at three individuals, while others insisted on a far higher threshold. As one judge famously asked: “If someone collects money from nine people, does that mean the law does not apply?”
A Law Frozen in Time?
Lawyer Nazih Bashir tells +963 that Law No. 8 once marked a milestone in Syria’s financial legislation. Yet after more than three decades, its relevance has inevitably come under scrutiny.
At its core – protecting public savings and preventing unlicensed financial schemes – the law remains essential. The need to shield consumers from pyramid schemes, phantom investments and fraudulent operators has not diminished.
But Bashir argues that the details of the law have not kept pace with technological and economic change. It was drafted before the age of the internet, cryptocurrency and global online trading platforms. Terms such as “money collection” and “operation” once referred to physical offices and in-person transactions; today, fraud takes place through cross-border apps, platforms and digital wallets.
Definitions in the 1994 law, he adds, do not account for modern practices such as digital-asset investment or crowdfunding. This gap leaves prosecutors struggling to pursue financial crimes committed online. Moreover, Syria’s economic landscape has changed dramatically, and new, flexible investment channels are needed. An overly rigid law may unintentionally hinder legitimate financial innovation unless modernised.
For Bashir, the solution is clear: while Law No. 8 still serves as a procedural anchor, it requires deep revisions – or a full replacement. A comprehensive “Modern Financial Crimes Law,” covering all digital and emerging financial offences, is urgently needed.
Read also: Muadamiyat al Sham West of Damascus Choked by Waste Burning
The Legacy of the Speculation Companies That Shattered Trust
Legal expert Imad-Eddin Shihab tells +963 that the origins of the law lie in the early 1990s, when large speculative companies began promising extraordinary returns, ultimately bankrupting thousands of families. Law No. 8 emerged as a necessary response, plugging a dangerous legal vacuum and drawing a firm line between regulated banking activity and illicit financial schemes. At the time, it brought a measure of stability to Syria’s financial environment.
But more than 30 years later, Shihab says, the law shows clear signs of age. Designed in the era of paper files, it no longer matches the digital tools used by modern fraudsters. It struggles to address today’s scams: fake cryptocurrency investments, fraudulent “forex” trading, network-marketing schemes that exploit legal loopholes, and cross-border online investment fraud that falls outside straightforward Syrian jurisdiction.
Shihab notes that the law lacks mechanisms to recover funds transferred abroad or laundered through digital channels. It focuses heavily on punishment rather than effective compensation for victims.
The legislator now faces a choice, he argues: either patch the law or replace it entirely. Most advanced economies have already modernised their frameworks through updated laws on cybercrime, anti-money laundering and digital-finance regulation.
For Syria, Shihab suggests several urgent reforms: expanding the definition of “money collection” to cover any activity aiming for investment returns – digital or otherwise – tightening penalties in line with the scale of modern financial crime and embedding international cooperation tools for tracing and prosecuting online offenders.
Shihab concludes by calling for an integrated new financial law aligned with anti-money-laundering and counter-terror finance frameworks. In this vision, Law No. 8 would remain a respected historical document – but it must make way for a more effective, future-proof system.
