I. Summary

It is not really a judicial process. It is a political process, and you're sentenced if your political thinking is wrong. 

-Western diplomat who regularly attends SSSC trials, April 2008.[1]

Forty years after its creation, the Supreme State Security Court (SSSC) remains one of the pillars of repression in Syria. An offspring of the state of emergency that the Syrian authorities declared on March 8, 1963, the government created the SSSC to prosecute those it deemed a threat to state security. In practice, the SSSC's role has been to prosecute those whom the Syrian authorities do not approve of in trials that lack basic due process guarantees. The SSSC consistently ignores claims by defendants that their confessions were extracted under torture and frequently convicts them on vague and overbroad offenses that essentially criminalize freedom of expression and association.

Since 1992, the SSSC has tried thousands of people. With time, as the government's perceived enemies have changed, so has the profile of the defendants. During the 1990s, the SSSC's favorite targets were communists, pan-Arab Nasserites, Iraqi Ba`athists, human rights activists, and Muslim Brotherhood members. Today, most of the defendants are suspected Islamists, often accused of being salafis (adherents to fundamentalist Islamic thought) or wanting to fight in Iraq, Kurdish activists demanding increased autonomy and cultural recognition, and independent activists who criticize the regime.

Amongst those recently tried by the SSSC are bloggers who posted articles critical of the authorities, a Kurdish university student who filmed the violent dispersal by the police of a peaceful demonstration of Kurdish children in 2003, and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood who returned from exile to Syria.

In preparing this report, Human Rights Watch compiled information about 237 cases, representing all of those known to have been decided by the SSSC between January 2007 and June 2008 (Annex I lists these cases). The SSSC suspended its operations in July 2008, following a riot that broke out in Sednaya prison, located about 30 kilometers north of Damascus, controlled by the military which holds the vast majority of the SSSC defendants. The suspension of trials is likely linked to the government's total blackout on information on the fate of detainees in Sednaya prison.

Since the SSSC neither grants access to independent observers nor publishes its proceedings, we collected our information from those who had access to the SSSC: defendants who have finished serving their sentence, defense lawyers, and foreign diplomats who gained access to the SSSC courtroom starting in 2004.

The cumulative evidence paints a bleak picture. Between January 2007 and June 2008, at least 33 defendants alleged before the SSSC that Syrian security services tortured them to extract their confessions. To Human Rights Watch's knowledge, the court took no steps to investigate these allegations. The court sentenced at least 153 defendants on the basis of vague or overbroad charges that criminalize freedom of expression and association. It sentenced at least 10 defendants for posting information online that was critical of the authorities. Prosecutors referred at least eight defendants to the SSSC because they "insulted the Syrian president." The court also sentenced at least 16 Kurdish activists for demanding increased autonomy and cultural recognition.                            

Created as an exceptional court, the SSSC exists outside the ordinary criminal justice system and is accountable only to the Minister of Interior, who acts as the delegated martial law governor.  By decree, it is exempt from the rules of criminal procedure that apply in Syria's criminal courts. Its non-compliance with international human rights standards is thus not surprising.

In the cases investigated by Human Rights Watch, we found that security forces detain defendants scheduled to appear before the SSSC for long periods of time – usually for months – before informing them of the charges against them. These waiting periods are a violation of a defendant's right to be informed promptly of the charges against him and right to a speedy trial. Even after the trial starts, Human Rights Watch's research shows that half the cases take at least three years to conclude even though most trials usually consist of four short sessions before the SSSC, often less than 30 minutes long each.

Lawyers play a largely ceremonial role during trial. In cases reviewed by Human Rights Watch, the court and the security services almost always deny them access to their clients prior to trial, and trial proceedings begin before lawyers have had an opportunity to see their client's file. Even after a trial begins, defendants have only very brief access to their lawyer, typically for a few minutes, and usually immediately before or after a trial session. The court also denies lawyers the opportunity to engage in oral defense on behalf of their clients, allowing them to submit only written defense statements.

Defendants have no right to appeal their verdict, a violation of Article 14(5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Syria is a state party. By decree, SSSC sentences are final but not enforceable until the President of the Republic ratifies them. In practice, however, the Minister of Interior ratifies the verdicts.

Criminalizing Freedom of Expression

Of the 237 cases it is known to have decided since January 2007, the SSSC sentenced at least 153 of the defendants on the basis of vague and overbroad offenses, such as "issuing calls that awaken racial or sectarian tensions," spreading "false or exaggerated information that weakens national sentiment," or undertaking "acts that […] disrupt Syria's ties to foreign states." The Syrian government has long relied on such broadly worded "security" provisions in its penal code, primarily based on speech or writings, as its primarily lever to silence critics, or perceived critics.

Table 1. Common Charges Against Defendants in SSSC Cases (out of 237 cases tried between Jan. 2007 and June 2008)

The SSSC has applied these provisions in a manner that infringes upon the right to freedom of expression in particular convicting persons for expressing peaceful political opinions. Since January 2007, the SSSC has sentenced at least 10 writers or bloggers because their writings "weakened national sentiment" or "exposed Syria to the danger of belligerent acts," and has tried another eight individuals for "insulting the Syrian president" in private conversations. For example, on April 15, 2007, the SSSC sentenced Muhamad Walid al-Husseini, 67, to three years in prison because a member of the security services overheard him insult the Syrian president and criticize corruption in Syria while sitting at the Rawda café in Damascus.One month later, on May 11, 2008,  the SSSC issued a three-year sentence against a blogger, Tarek Biasi, 23, because he "insulted security services" online.

The prosecution of ordinary Syrian citizens for expressing criticism of the president or the government, sometimes in the privacy of their own homes or at their place of employment, is indicative of the extent to which the government uses the SSSC to prevent any expression of opposition. Accusations of neighbors, friends or family members are sometimes enough to land a person in jail. 

Overbroad Accusations against Suspected Islamists

The largest group of defendants before the SSSC in the last three years can broadly be categorized as "Islamists" – proponents of an Islamic state where shari`a (Islamic law) would be enforced. Trial observation notes by diplomats attending the SSSC and statements issued by Syrian lawyers and human rights groups show that the court described as "salafis" at least 106 of the 237 defendants before the SSSC between January 2007 and June 2008.  The court uses this designation where it considers the defendants to have espoused radical ideas, such as establishing an Islamic state in Syria or expressed a desire to fight in Iraq. It accused another 22 of membership of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.

A review of trial notes shows that the prosecution usually charges these defendants with "awakening sectarian tensions" (Art. 285 of the Penal Code) and "membership in an association created to change the economic or social structure of the state" through "terrorist means" (Art. 306 of the Penal Code). The SSSC relied on this last provision to convict at least 106 defendants since January 2007.

Yet, Human Rights Watch's investigation shows that in these cases, the prosecutor often failed to produce evidence that the defendants actually belonged to a group planning to use "terrorist means," as required by Syrian law. We found 15 cases where the SSSC relied solely on the defendants' possession of CDs and books by fundamentalist clerics as "evidence" of belonging to groups planning terrorist acts. In these cases, the prosecution presented no evidence in court to show that these individuals, or the groups they are accused of belonging to, planned to use violence or terrorism. We did find a handful of cases where the SSSC prosecutor presented additional evidence against presumed salafis, such as possession of explosives, firearms or specific plans.  But generally, the court was not presented with any such evidence before convicting the defendants. In the words of a Damascus-based diplomat who has been a long-time observer of the court, "the only evidence against many of the so-called Islamists is their possession of CD's, booklets etc. of apparently radical Imams."[2]

The SSSC has cast the net too wide in its prosecution of Islamists and has blurred the lines between holding or expressing fundamentalist religious opinions or beliefs (which is protected by international law) and actual acts which warrant being criminalized, such as involvement in violence. Individuals who simply hold salafi opinions but do not incite violence and otherwise abide by a state's laws should not be prosecuted.

Criminalizing Kurdish Activism

The arrest and trials of Kurdish activists is part of the broader Syrian policy of suppressing the demands for cultural rights and increased autonomy by the Kurdish minority in Syria. The crackdown on Kurdish activists accelerated after March 2004 when serious clashes occurred between Kurdish demonstrators and security forces in the northern town of Qamishli that left more than 30 dead, most of them Kurds. 

The most common accusation against Kurdish activists is undertaking any "acts, speeches, writings or other means to cut-off part of Syrian land to join it to another country" (Art. 267 of the Penal Code). The SSSC invoked this provision against at least 16 defendants between January 2007 and June 2008, the vast majority of whom had only participated in peaceful activities. Examples include sentencing activists for presenting a petition to the National Assembly to "remove the barriers imposed on the Kurdish language and culture" or for participating in a peaceful demonstration to demand that Syrian authorities allow Kurdish children to learn in their own language.

Past Criticisms of the SSSC and the Way Forward

The SSSC's repeated breaches of basic human rights standards have not gone unnoticed. The United Nations, Syrian and international human rights groups, and Syrian lawyers in the past repeatedly have criticized the SSSC. For example, the UN Human Rights Committee, the body charged with monitoring states' compliance with the ICCPR, stated in 2005 that SSSC procedures are incompatible with the provisions of the ICCPR. Writing 13 years ago about the SSSC, Human Rights Watch also noted that "defendants prosecuted in the state security court are denied their right under international law to a fair and public trial by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal."[3]

Western diplomats who began observing trials at the SSSC since 2004 also have been highly critical of the SSSC and its president, Fayez al-Nuri, in private conversations with Human Rights Watch.  A Western diplomat, who has frequently attended the SSSC proceedings over the last three years, told Human Rights Watch:

I have never seen al-Nuri really look at a file. He basically tells the defendant, "this is the charge, what do you have to say?" As the defendant speaks, he may suddenly say, "enough!" The prosecutor never asks questions. He might add a comment or share a joke with al-Nuri.[4]

According to another diplomat, "short of disbanding the court, there is no way to improve an institution whose very existence is antithetical to human rights."[5]

Human Rights Watch agrees with this assessment. The scope of violations committed by the SSSC and the Syrian authorities' enduring refusal to reform it mean that this institution should be dissolved. The Syrian authorities should release defendants facing prosecution solely for their non-violent expression or association. It should transfer cases where there is evidence that a defendant committed recognizable criminal offenses to regular criminal courts and ensure that these defendants receive a fair trial in accordance with international human rights standards. In addition, the Syrian judiciary should investigate the numerous allegations of torture at the hands of the security services and reject any forced coercions.

The timing is opportune to dissolve the SSSC since the authorities suspended trials before the SSSC since July 2008. The government should make permanent this temporary suspension; it also should immediately reveal information on the fate of the detainees in Sednaya.

The Syrian authorities have demonstrated no commitment to end the use of SSSC as a tool of repression and the international community, in particular, the European Union and its member states need to play a key role in pushing it in that direction. The recently improved relationship between the Europeans and the Syrian government presents an important opportunity for a more assertive and vocal European role in addressing ongoing human rights violations in Syria. In particular, the European Union should condition any further progress in its relations with Syria, in particular the entry into force of the Association Agreement, on the dissolution of the SSSC, the release of defendants facing prosecution solely for their non-violent expression or association, as well as on concrete and measurable commitments by Syria to cease the use of torture and ill-treatment in interrogations.