IV. The SSSC’s Recent Activities: Ongoing Violations

Human Rights Watch compiled information about 237 cases decided by the SSSC between January 2007 and June 2008 (Annex I lists these cases). While the degree of information obtained for each case varies, the cumulative evidence paints a bleak picture: 33 defendants alleged before the SSSC that members of Syrian security services extracted their confessions under torture. To Human Rights Watch’s knowledge, the court took no steps to investigate these allegations. The court sentenced 153 defendants on the basis of vague or overbroad charges that criminalize freedom of expression and association; it sentenced ten defendants for posting information online that was critical of the authorities. Eight defendants were referred to the SSSC because they “insulted the Syrian president or criticized `Alawites;”[90] and the court sentenced at least 16 Kurdish activists for advocating for Kurdish rights.

A. Reliance on Coerced Confessions

Human Rights Watch’s review of trial notes prepared by foreign diplomats as well as statements issued by defense lawyers and Syrian human rights groups shows that at least 33 defendants who appeared before the SSSC between January 2007 and June 2008 claimed that the Syrian security services extracted their confessions using torture. In none of the trial notes reviewed is there information to suggest that the judge undertook any steps to investigate the torture allegations.

Examples of some of the allegations made by the 33 defendants include:

• On November 11, 2007, Ali al-Kurdi, a Syrian Kurd living in Qamishli, told the SSSC that his interrogators had tortured him and made him sign a confession without reading it.[91] He alleged that he only learned later that he had confessed to planning to commit terrorist acts. He repeated his torture allegations at the following session on February 24, 2008.[92]
• On November 18, 2007, Ibrahim Kabaro told the SSSC that the Palestine Branch of the  Military Intelligence held him incommunicado during nine days and during that time coerced him into confessing that he owned books by the salafi Sheikh Mahmud Aghassi (known in Syria as Abu al-Qa`qa`) and that he had sold some of them.[93]
• On November 25, 2007, Abdel Rahman al-Basiri told the SSSC that the security services beat and tortured him and that the traces of the torture were still visible on his body. The judge refused to allow him to show the physical evidence on his body.[94]
• On February 24, 2008, Abdel Majeed Ghuneim and Abdel Rahman al-Nu`aimi told the SSSC that Syrian security services coerced them into confessing that they were salafis who wanted to blow up a statue of President al-Asad.[95]

Table 2. Individuals Known to Have Made Allegations of Torture before the SSSC between January 2007 and June 2008[96]

Date of Trial Session when Defendant alleged Torture	Name of Defendant(s) (grouped if individuals tried as a group)
February 25, 2007	Manhal Su`ayfan Ben Ali `Izzeldin Qassem Ben Ahmad `Issam Ben Ali `Akasha
March 22, 2007	Ahmad Hamdan Muhammad Hamdan
March 22, 2007	Maher Suidan al-Ramdoon Hadi Dandal
June 17, 2007	Muhamad Hilal Abdel Jawad Abu al-Hawa
September 23, 2007	Husam Ben Mamdu’ `Ar`ur
September 23, 2007	Amer Hammami,
September 30, 2007	Saleh Othman
October 21, 2007	Fadi Issa
October 21, 2007	Muhamad Abdel Rahman Abdallah
October 21, 2007	Nuri Hammoud al-Nayef Salman Khalaf al-Jabr
November 4, 2007	Muhamad `Abid al-Ahmad Ben Issa Nasser Nasser
November 11, 2007	Ali al-Kurdi
November 18, 2007	Ibrahim Kabaro
November 18, 2007	Musa Isma`il Ali
November 25, 2007	Abdel Raham Al-Basiri
February 24, 2008	Abdel Majeed Ghuneim Abdel Rahman al-Nu`aimi
February 24, 2008	Izzat Howari
March 2, 2008	Sa`id Hamada Ben Mahmud
March 3, 2008	`Amer al-Salkhadi
March 10, 2008	Ahmad Ali Khaled Ahmad Mer`i Khaled Ali al-Khalaf Khaled Abdel Rahman Kasem Ali Khaled
June 22, 2008	Abdel Qader `Alayan
June 29, 2008	Hokar Ramadan

Defense lawyers and Syrian human rights activists estimate that Syrian security forces have tortured an even higher number of defendants before the SSSC but that many do not dare mention the torture in the courtroom because representatives of security services are present during proceedings.[97] A defense lawyer who regularly appears before the SSSC, told Human Rights Watch:

The truth is that the vast majority of accused have been tortured. It is rare that a defendant has not been tortured. Unfortunately, the court continues to rely on the investigations conducted by the security services and has never—to my knowledge—opened any investigation into the torture cases.[98]

In some cases, defendants have taken off their shirts in court to show the judge the traces of torture. A defense lawyer told Human Rights Watch, “I have witnessed a number of defendants trying to show signs of torture on their bodies before the judge.”[99] A defendant who has finished serving his sentence described to Human Rights Watch his sentencing day:

Just after Fayez al-Nouri [the presiding judge of the SSSC] sentenced me, I took off my shirt to show the diplomats and lawyers in the audience the traces of torture on my back. Immediately, members of security jumped on me.[100]

Based on testimonies from a number of former detainees, the most common forms of torture used by the security forces to extract confessions are beatings and kicking on all parts of the body, especially beatings on the soles of the feet (falqa). A defendant described the torture that he endured at the Political Security branch during investigation in 2003:

The investigation began. It involved beating and more beating. Ali Makhlouf [head of political security] was present. The investigation lasted for 12 days. Two sessions of beatings per day. They beat me on the bottom of my feet, on my head. After 20 days in detention, they took me to an office and told me to sign my confession. I said, “I want to read it.” I was beaten again, forced to thumb print the confession and sign. I never managed to read it.[101]

Interrogators used a number of devices to immobilize detainees and facilitate the beatings. A defendant sentenced by the SSSC in November 2005 described to Human Rights Watch the dulab (the “tire”), a common form of torture where security forces make a victim lie down and bend his knees and then place a car tire around his legs to keep the bottom of his feet exposed:

They [Air Force intelligence members] put me in a tire to expose the bottom of my feet and started beating me with a cane. Whenever I would lose feeling from the repeated hits, they would throw water on my feet so that it would hurt again. Afterwards, they would make me strip and stand in the cold March weather.[102]

A third detainee sentenced by the SSSC in October 2004 described how in 2003 members of Political Security tortured him after tying him to a rectangular wooden plank known as the “flying carpet” (bsat al-Reeh):

After they tied me down, they started stepping on my legs, hands and stomach. Then they beat me with a cane and a cable. After beating me, they forced me to do exercises to get the blood circulating again. At one point, they even used electricity on me. It was on my big toe. But the most common form was the beating.[103]

Despite the frequent allegations that security services rely on torture to extract confessions, the SSSC has failed to investigate them. It continues to rely on confessions signed by defendants while held incommunicado by security services. According to a lawyer who appeared multiple times before the SSSC, “Fayez al-Nuri’s [the SSSC’s chief judge] reaction to the torture complaints was to mock them, saying that all defendants repeat these allegations.”[104]

Another lawyer who frequently appears before the SSSC expressed frustration at his inability to challenge confessions extracted by security services:

Unfortunately, the court accepts these confessions and bases its judgments—in the vast majority of cases—on these confessions alone. It is very difficult for a lawyer to have the opportunity to challenge these confessions or prove otherwise.[105]

In June 2002, Judge al-Nuri threw the lawyer and human rights activist Anwar al-Bunni out of court after al-Bunni insisted on requesting an investigation into claims that the security services had tortured his client, `Aref Dalilah, in detention.[106]

B. Criminalizing Freedom of Expression

Human Rights Watch’s review of 237 SSSC decisions issued between January 2007 and June 2008 shows that the court convicted 153 defendants on the basis of one of four provisions in the Syrian penal code. These provisions are so broadly articulated that the SSSC is able to punish a range of peaceful activities and free expression with the legal cover of protecting national security. The four penal provisions are:

• Article 278 (undertaking “acts, writings, or speech unauthorized by the government that expose Syria to the danger of belligerent acts or that disrupt Syria’s ties to foreign states”);
• Article 285 (“issuing calls that weaken national sentiment or awaken racial or sectarian tensions while Syria is at war or is expecting a war”);
• Article 286 (spreading “false or exaggerated information that weakens national sentiment while Syria is at war or is expecting a war”);
• Article 307 (undertaking “acts, writings or speech that incite sectarian, racial or religious strife.”)

The most commonly used charge was Article 285, on the basis of which the SSSC convicted 104 defendants. The elements of this provision, in particular “weakening national sentiment” and “awakening sectarian tensions,” are so broad that they can and have been applied to acts that the state—arbitrarily and subjectively—judges against its “national interest.”

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Syria is a state party, guarantees the right to “hold opinions without interference,” and “have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers.”[107] A state party to the ICCPR may restrict the right to freedom of expression, but such restrictions may be only such as provided by law and as “necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others or for the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.”

According to Prof. Manfred Nowak, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture in his authoritative analysis of the ICCPR, the restrictions specified on freedom of expression should be interpreted narrowly, with terms such as “national security” and “public order” referring only to situations involving an immediate and violent threat to the nation.[108]

The Syrian authorities have not abided by this narrow interpretation. Rather, they have equated acts or speeches that are critical of the government’s policies or the state’s leaders with acts that are threats to national security and have used these laws to try writers and bloggers who criticize the authorities as well as individuals accused of insulting the president.

1. Trials of Writers and Bloggers

Between January 2007 and June 2008, the SSSC has relied on broad criminal provisions to sentence ten writers and bloggers who had criticized the authorities.

On June 17, 2007, the SSSC sentenced a group of seven young men Husam Melhem, Tariq al-Ghourani, Ayham Saqr, `Ulam Fakhour, Maher Ibrahim Asper, Omar al-Abdullah, and Diab Siriya to sentences varying from five to seven years in jail for “taking action or making a written statement or speech which could endanger the State or harm its relationship with a foreign country, or expose it to the risk of hostile action.” They had developed a youth discussion group and published certain articles online that were critical of the Syrian authorities.[109]

On September 23, 2007, the SSSC sentenced Ali Zein al-`Abideen Mej`an to two years in prison for “undertaking acts or writing or speech unauthorized by the government ... that spoil its ties with a foreign state” because he posted comments online attacking Saudi Arabia.[110] 

On April 7, 2008, the SSSC sentenced the writer and poet Firas Sa`ad, 38, to four years in jail for spreading “false or exaggerated information that weaken national sentiment while Syria is at war or is expecting a war” for publishing articles on the website “Al-hiwar al-Mutamaddin” (www.ahewar.org). In his articles, he defended the Beirut-Damascus Declaration calling for improved relations between Syria and Lebanon and criticized the Syrian army’s role in the 2006 July War in Lebanon.[111]

One month later, on May 11, 2008,  the SSSC issued a three-year sentence against another blogger, Tarek Biasi, 23, whom the government detained in July 2007 accusing him of “insulting security services” online, and charging him with “weakening national sentiment.”[112]

Karim `Arbaji, 29, the moderator of www.akhawia.net, a popular online forum for Syrian youth covering social and political issues, is currently facing trial before the SSSC for  “spreading false information that may weaken national sentiment.”[113]

The restriction on these writers’ freedom of expression cannot be justified as necessary to protect Syria’s national security and violates Syria’s obligations under international law. The correspondence between the UN and Syrian officials regarding the arrest of a blogger in 2003 is particularly revealing of the discrepancy between the Syrian government’s understanding of legitimate restrictions on freedom of expression and its actual obligations under international law. When asked by three UN Special Rapporteurs about the 2003 arrest of `Abd al-Rahman al-Shaghuri after he had emailed articles copied from the Levant News website (http://www.thisissyria.net), a website closely affiliated with the Syrian opposition, the Syrian government replied by saying that it considered the site’s content “detrimental to the reputation and security of the nation,” and “full of ideas and views opposed to the system of government in Syria.”[114] The SSSC ended up sentencing `Abd al-Rahman al-Shaghuri to three years in prison (and then reduced the sentence to two-and-a-half years) for “publishing lies” and disseminating articles “that harmed the image and security of Syria.”

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention noted how the “fairly terse” information provided by the Syrian authorities “fails to reveal how and to what extent the information disseminated by Mr. al-Shaghouri through the Internet was detrimental to the security and reputation of the country,” concluding that its references to the “interests of national security” were “unsubstantiated.”[115]

2. Trials of Individuals who Insult the President

The SSSC also has tried between January 2007 and June 2008 at least eight individuals for criticizing the government's policies or the Syrian president in private conversations. Those accused have included ordinary Syrian citizens – including mechanics, small shop owners, and employees – with no evidence of political involvement, merely overheard, in their personal environments, expressing criticism of the president or the government. The fact that the government has persecuted these people, often relying on the surveillance and reports of neighbors, friends and family members, acting as informants, is indicative of the extent of the government’s long-arm reach into the personal lives of Syrian citizens and its need to protect itself from any “threat,” no matter how insignificant.  Of the eight cases reviewed, one was sentenced, six are still believed to be on trial at the time of writing, and one’s status is unknown, as the SSSC president had stated his intent to release him but Human Rights Watch has not obtained any information on whether he was actually released. 

On April 15, 2007, the SSSC sentenced Muhamad Walid al-Husseini, 67, to three years in jail for spreading “false or exaggerated information that weaken national sentiment” (Art. 286 of Penal Code) as well as defaming the Syrian president (Art. 376 of Penal Code). According to a statement by the Syrian Human Rights Organization (SHRO) which had a member act as the defendant’s lawyer, the court sentenced al-Husseini because a member of the security services heard him insulting the Syrian president and criticizing corruption in Syria while sitting at the Rawda café in Damascus.[116]  SHRO’s statement does not refer to any additional evidence against the defendant.

On July 22, 2007, Ahmad Salman, a car mechanic, appeared before the SSSC on charges of insulting the Syrian president and the `Alawite community – the sect of Shi`a Islam to which the Asad family belongs – during a fight with another car mechanic. According to notes by European diplomats present in the court that day, five witnesses testified that Salman did participate in the fight but denied hearing him insult the Syrian President or the `Alawites, and subsequently the president of the SSSC stated that he intended to release Salman.[117] No further information was obtained on whether Salman was released.

On that same day, Mustapha Ahmad Jablawi and his brother `Omar, appeared before the SSSC on charges of insulting the government and the `Alawite community. According to notes of the trial, Mustapha Jablawi denied the accusations and told the court that he was wrongly accused by his business partner with whom he had a fight over 315,000 Syrian pounds give (approximately $6,800).[118] Human Rights Watch was unable to obtain any further information on the case, as the Jablawi brothers do not appear in any of the other trial notes reviewed by Human Rights Watch.

On November 18, 2007, the SSSC interrogated Moudher Yagi, who is reported to have said during a large family gathering that Syrian officials “had committed errors in Lebanon which lead to the death of former [Lebanese] Prime Minister Hariri” and to have expressed a “negative opinion of President al-Asad while endorsing former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein.” He is charged with spreading “false or exaggerated information that weakens national sentiment” (Art. 286 of Penal Code) as well as defaming the Syrian president (Art. 376 of Penal Code).[119] His trial is ongoing.

On April 13, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Samir Barghache, who reportedly insulted President Bashar al-Asad while at his uncle’s home. According to notes of diplomatic trial observers, Syrian security services arrested Barghache after informants told them that he had insulted President Bashar al-Asad while watching television at his uncle’s home. Barghache reportedly compared the Syrian president and Saddam Hussein, noting that in the same way President Saddam’s control over Iraq ended, so would President Bashar’s. In the court, Barghache disputed the allegations of the informants and asked that the owner of the house where he was watching television be called in to testify. The trial is ongoing and is pending resumption of the SSSC activities.[120]

On May 18, 2008, the SSSC interrogated `Amer Salkhadi, who is facing charges of insulting the government and the former Syrian president, Hafez al-Asad. The court listened to two witnesses. According to notes of diplomatic trial observers, the first witness stated that he heard Salkhadi saying that Hafez al-Asad was a thief. The second witness denied hearing anything. The judge said they will listen to a third witness.[121] The trial is ongoing and is pending resumption of SSSC activities.

On the same day, the SSSC interrogated Mohamad Ahmad Ayyan, a Syrian working in Lebanon at a tire repair shop. He is charged with undertaking acts that “may expose Syria to aggression or may spoil its relations with another country” (Art. 278 of Penal Code) because he reportedly participated in an anti-Syria demonstration while in Lebanon. According to the notes of diplomats and a lawyer present that day in court, Ayyan denied the accusation and stated that his boss had falsely accused him because of another fight they had.[122] The trial is ongoing and is pending resumption of SSSC activities.

C. Overbroad Accusations against Suspected “Salafis”

As discussed in Section III.C above (“Profile of Current Defendants before the SSSC”),  of the 237 individuals that the SSSC is known to have sentenced between January 2007 and June 2008, the court described in its proceedings at least 106 of them as “salafis,” and accused another 22 of membership in the banned Muslim Brotherhood.[123]

While Syria has a legitimate interest in protecting its national security by arresting and trying those that genuinely threaten the security of the state, it must do so using methods that are consistent with international human rights law.[124]  In particular, it must not cast the net too wide by using “security” as an excuse to prosecute defendants who simply hold or express opinions that are contrary to the government’s interests.[125]

The European Court for Human Rights’ (ECtHR) jurisprudence, while non-binding on Syria, also offers important guidance, as the ECtHR has frequently grappled with the tension between freedom of expression and national security. According to ECtHR judgments, expressions of hostility towards national authorities, support for separatist aspirations, and promotion of shari`a law are protected speech to the extent they do not directly advocate violence.[126] The ECtHR even found that statements giving moral support to violent or terrorist movements are protected by freedom of expression provisions if the authorities are unable to provide convincing evidence that these statements would have a “harmful effect on the prevention of disorder and crime.”[127]

Human Rights Watch’s review of trial notes from the SSSC as well as interviews with defense lawyers, human rights activists and Western diplomats monitoring the SSSC show that the SSSC has failed to limit itself to sentencing defendants for acts that directly incite violence, but rather has egregiously violated its national and international legal obligations by trying defendants for holding opinions that the authorities dislike. The SSSC has also prosecuted defendants for membership in groups that believe in the establishment of an Islamic state without establishing that such groups advocate violence to achieve their goal.

Human Rights Watch found a pattern of cases where the SSSC relied solely on defendants’ possession of CDs and books by extremist clerics to charge and sentence defendants with “membership in an association created to change the economic or social structure of the state or the fundamental fabric of society” through “terrorist means” (Art. 306(1) of the Syrian Penal Code) and “awakening sectarian tensions” (Art. 285 of the Syrian Penal Code):

• On September 23, 2007, the SSSC interrogated Mu`awiya al-Hasan, a student at the University of Damascus, based on charges that he was “awakening sectarian strife”.[128] According to trial notes by European diplomats, the Syrian authorities had found CDs of Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Baz in his apartment.[129] The trial observers did not note any additional evidence presented in court. Two months later, on November 25, 2007, the SSSC sentenced him to two years in jail.[130]
• On October 28, 2007, the SSSC interrogated Hussein al-Wasil based on charges that he belonged to a salafi group aimed at changing the structure of the state through “terrorist means” (Art. 306 of Penal Code). According to trial notes by European diplomats, the SSSC judge stated that al-Wasil had bought CDs and books that are takfiri in nature and call for jihad in Iraq. The only additional evidence noted by European diplomats was that the SSSC presiding judge noted that “al-Wasil had a beard at the time he was arrested.” At his trial session on October 28, 2007, al-Wasil said that he bought the books in a known bookshop in Damascus, Dar al-Qur’an al-Karim (the house of the Koran).[131] The sentencing was scheduled for December 30, 2007, but Human Rights Watch has no information on whether the session took place, as al-Wasil’s case does not appear in any subsequent notes by diplomats or Syrian activists and lawyers.
• On the same day as al-Wasil’s interrogation, the SSSC also interrogated Khaled Najib, a political science student, about his studies at a Yemeni mosque and his membership in a salafi group. According to trial notes by European diplomats, Najib admitted to having visited Egyptian religious websites and listening to “Salafi takfiri” CDs, but stated that he did so “as part of his study” and that he had also consulted nationalist and communist literature. The diplomats described the SSSC presiding judge as admonishing him for not adhering to Ba`athist ideas.  The trial observers’ notes do not refer to any additional evidence.[132] Human Rights Watch has no additional information on the case because it does not appear in any subsequent notes of diplomats or Syrian activists and lawyers.
• On November 18, 2007, the SSSC interrogated Ibrahim Kabaro and accused him of possessing salafi books (including books by Sheikh Mahmud Agassi, also known as Abu al-Qa`qa)[133] and selling these books to another. The SSSC also accused Kabaro of insulting the Syrian authorities and the `Alawite community. Kabaro denied the accusation and indicated that members of the Palestine branch of security services extracted his confessions using torture “inflicted during nine days while he was at the Palestine branch.” Trial notes by European diplomats do not refer to any additional evidence or to any links between Kabaro’s possession of such books and the likelihood of imminent violence.[134] Human Rights Watch has no additional information on the case because Kabaro’s name does not appear in any subsequent notes of diplomats or Syrian activists and lawyers.
• On December 9, 2007, the SSSC sentenced `Amer Hamami to three years in jail for “weakening national sentiment and awakening sectarian strife” (Art. 285 of Penal Code). Trial notes by European diplomats show that the only evidence presented against Hamami was that he had copied 25 CDs that promoted the acts of the Muslim Brotherhood.[135]
• On April 13, 2008, the SSSC interrogated a group of detainees, including Abdel Wahab al-Sa`di, Ahmad al-Sa`di, Omar Jubayr, and Fares Jbaoui, on the accusation of belonging to a salafi group planning a terrorist attack. According to trial notes, the Syrian security services reportedly found “CDs and books of a Saudi inspiration” [referring to CDs and books with a “Wahabi” interpretation of Islam] in the homes of the defendants. The trial notes do not reveal any additional evidence presented in court. The defendants reportedly admitted to ownership of the books but denied any membership in a salafi or takfiri group.[136] Their trial is ongoing due to the suspension in the activities of the SSSC since the beginning of July.
• On April 20, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Ahmad Firas al-Qadi, a university student from Aleppo, based on charges that he belonged to a salafi organization planning “terrorist acts.” Diplomats observing the trial noted that the SSSC focused its interrogation on the fact that al-Qadi “consulted books by al-Afghani and rented movies with a subversive content” and that he questioned in a public gathering “the methods of electing Syrian parliamentarians.”[137] According to the trial notes, the defendant admitted that he criticized the election of Syrian parliamentarians but denied that he had ever belonged or trained with an Islamist group. The notes describe the SSSC president as telling him that “the members of Syria’s parliament are elected democratically and that he did not understand anything about democracy.”[138] The sentencing was scheduled for May 19, 2008 but subsequent notes by diplomats and Syrian lawyers make no mention of such a session.
• On May 11, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Ousama Zab`oun, a teacher and a calligraphist from Hama, accused of “weakening national sentiment” and belonging to a “salafi group planning to use terrorist means.” According to diplomat’s notes, the evidence against him was that he wrote “salafi expressions on a banner destined for a mosque” and possessed banned salafi books. The defendant denied any knowledge that the words on the banners were salafi and reported that the Mosque’s sheikh had told him these were words from the Prophet Muhammad.[139] The next session was scheduled for July 21, 2008, but the SSSC suspended its operations at the beginning of July.
• On May 11, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Mustafa Mamo and `Omar Sheikh al-Ard for awakening sectarian strife and belonging to a salafi group planning terrorist acts. According to diplomat’s notes, the SSSC focused on books owned by the two as well as confessions about meetings they held. The notes state that Mamo admitted to meeting a group from the Jam`at al-Da`wa wal Tabligh (“group that propagates the faith”) and to owning the books seized from his house, but indicated that he obtained these books during his pilgrimage to Mecca.[140] According to the same notes, the court accused Omar Sheikh al-Ard of adhering to a Wahhabi movement and owning forbidden books that security police seized from his apartment.[141] The next session was scheduled for July 28, 2008, but the SSSC suspended its operations at the beginning of July.
• On May 18, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Mohamad Bassem Majni and his brother Firas, two owners of a restaurant in Sahnaya, for belonging to a group that “sought to modify the nature of the state.” According to a diplomat’s notes, the evidence against them was a tape found in their car containing Islamist teachings and salafi books found at their home, including a book entitled Riyad al-Saleheen (Heavens of the devoted).[142] The next session was scheduled for June 30, 2008, but the SSSC suspended its operations at the beginning of July.

According to diplomats and lawyers who regularly attend the SSSC, the court’s practice of relying on possession of books and CDs as sufficient evidence to convict a defendant of membership in a violent salafi group is very. A Syrian human rights activist who regularly defends detainees before the SSSC told Human Rights Watch, “90% of the material evidence against defendants in such cases is CDs and books promoting fundamentalist thought.”[143] A Damascus-based Western diplomat who has attended SSSC trial sessions for a number of years shared his view: “Many of the so-called Islamists are only accused of being in possession of CD's, booklets etc. of apparently radical Imams.”[144]  As another diplomat put it,  “in trials of detainees ‘of Islamic profile,’  the narratives given by judge or mukhabarat sound often highly implausible, including conspiracy theories, references to CIA, al-Qa'ida.”[145]

Human Rights Watch’s review of available trial notes confirms that only in a handful of cases did the SSSC prosecutor present additional evidence against presumed salafis. For example, on February 24, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Abdul Majid Ghuneim and Abdul Rahman Kadram about explosives found in their house.[146] On April 28, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Moussa Isma`il Ali, Khaled Dabbour and Abdul Kari Khalil, about weapons that they reportedly sold.[147] On May 4, 2008, the SSSC interrogated Usama Nisani, about materials found in his house that would be “sufficient to make a bomb.”[148] 

The consequence is that the SSSC has cast the net too wide and has blurred the lines between holding extreme religious opinions or beliefs —which is protected by international law—and acts which can be legitimately held to be criminal—such as actively working to violently overthrow a government . Individuals who may hold salafi opinions but abide by a state’s laws are not criminals. A lawyer who frequently represents defendants before the SSSC framed it well:

There are some extremist currents in Syria, but as an observer, I say that the percentage of such groups that have a minimum of organizational support does not go beyond the 2 to 3% of the detainees before the SSSC. The rest have no connection with any organized or ideological movement and their relationship with religion is simply a cultural issue.[149]

D. Criminalizing Kurdish Activism

A review of cases before the SSSC shows that the most common accusation against Kurdish activists is undertaking “acts, speech, writings or other means to cut off part of Syrian land to join it to another country” (Art. 267 of the Penal Code). Human Rights Watch’s research shows that since 2004 the SSSC has applied this provision to sentence at least 16 Syrian Kurds who undertook peaceful activities to demand increased autonomy and cultural recognition for Kurds in Syria.

Sentencing of Two Leaders of Yekiti Party for Petition

In February 2004, the SSSC convicted two leaders in the unauthorized Kurdish Yekiti party, Hassan Saleh and Marwan `Uthman, on charges of attempting “to cut-off part of Syrian land to join it to another country.” They were sentenced to three years,’ which the court later reduced to 14 months.[150]

Syrian security forces had arrested the men on December 15, 2002, five days after their party had staged a sit-in outside the Syrian National Assembly; they had tried to deliver a statement to the President of the National Assembly calling on the Syrian regime to "remove the barriers imposed on the Kurdish language and culture and recognize the existence of the Kurdish nationality within the unity of the country.”[151]

Sentencing of Eight Participants in Demonstration in Front of UNICEF

On June 25, 2003, a group of over 100 children and adults gathered outside the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) building in Damascus demanding that Syrian authorities grant stateless Kurds citizenship and allow Kurdish children to study in their own language.[152]  The organizers had prepared a memorandum outlining their demands that they had planned to hand to UNICEF officials. Members of the security forces broke up the peaceful protest and detained seven protestors: Muhamad Mustapha, Sherif Ramadan, Khaled Ahmad `Ali, `Amr Murad, Salar Saleh, Hosam Muhammad Amin, and Hussein Ramadan.[153]

One month later, on July 24, 2003, members of the political security forces arrested Mas`ud Hamed, a Kurdish journalism student, for taking photographs of the violent dispersal of the demonstration and posting the photographs online.[154]

The police held the seven men detained on the day of the protest incommunicado for 25 days at the Fayha’ Branch of Political Security, a branch of Syria’s multiple security services, before moving them to `Adra prison where they again placed them in tiny solitary confinement cells and, according to a detainee, subjected them to further ill-treatment. He described his experience to Human Rights Watch:

We were transferred from the police station to Fayha’ Branch. We spent 25 days there. The detention conditions were horrible. We were 70 people in a room that measured 3m x 5m. The next day the interrogation started. They said, “We will let you go out in 24 hours if you work for us. We want information on Kurdish activists and groups.” When I refused to cooperate, my situation worsened. They started beating me. They would beat me on my feet, on my entire body.

After 20 days, they told us to sign our confessions. When I said that I wanted to read the confession, they started beating me and forced me to sign with my thumbprint. Eventually, I signed without reading it.

After signing, they took us to `Adra [prison]. I was placed in a tiny room of 2m x 0.85m, with the toilet taking a large part of it.

After two-and-a-half months in `Adra, they referred us to the SSSC. We saw an investigative judge named Mansour. We did not have any lawyers. He asked me about the initial confession, and I denied many aspects of it.

My first court session was on January 11, 2004. The lawyers were appointed on the same day.

On June 27, 2004, the SSSC convicted the initial seven detainees of “membership in a secret organization” and “attempting to annex part of Syrian territory to another country.” The court sentenced three of them to two years’ imprisonment, and four others to one year, but immediately released them, given the time they had already spent in detention.[155]

On October 10, 2004, the SSSC sentenced Mas`ud Hamed, the one who had photographed the demonstration, to three years in jail on the same charges.

In response to a request for information from the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Syrian authorities claimed that the court tried Hamed for being “a member of a proscribed Kurdish party called “Yakiti”; for disseminating inflammatory propaganda; and for publishing articles, under a pseudonym, in an unauthorized magazine called DEM.” They also accused him of printing “1,000 copies of a calendar showing a map of what purports to be Kurdistan, with the intention of distributing it among Kurdish students at Damascus University.”[156]  Even if Hamed had carried out all the acts of which the government accused him, these acts are protected, under international law, by his rights to freedom of expression and association.

Sentencing of Kurdish Student for Unpublished Article

On November 27, 2005, the SSSC sentenced Shevan `Abdo, 24, a Kurdish university student, to two-and-a-half years for “weakening national sentiment” (Art. 285 of Penal Code), “inciting sectarian tensions” (Art. 298 of Penal Code), and  writings intended “to cut-off part of Syrian land to join it to another country” (Art. 267 of the Penal Code). Syrian Air Force Intelligence arrested `Abdo on March 29, 2004 at the gates of the University of Damascus while looking for another student named Shevan, known to be a student leader. `Abdo recalled his arrest to Human Rights Watch:

I was stopped at the gates of the university. The security services were looking for another “Shevan” who was known for his activism amongst the Kurdish university population.  However, when they stopped me, they found on me an article I had just written about arrests against Kurdish university students following the Qamishli events and the broader repression against the Kurds in Syria since the 1960s. The article had not even been published. I had just finished writing it six hours earlier.

`Abdo spent four-and-a-half months in incommunicado detention at the Air Force intelligence detention center before seeing the investigative judge at the SSSC. According to `Abdo, he told the investigative judge that Air Force intelligence agents repeatedly beat him during his detention, but the judge did not show any interest and did not order an investigation. The actual trial started nine months after the arrest.

The whole thing lasted three sessions. My first session was for 30 minutes. This was the first time I saw my lawyer. The judge read the article I wrote during the session and asked me a few questions. This was the only time I spoke during the trial. He told me that I did not understand anything, and my facts on the repression of Kurds were all wrong. The second session was supposed to be my defense session. My lawyer had prepared a statement arguing that I should be amnestied like other Kurds detained after the Qamishli events. I refused that defense because I wanted to defend my article and asked for the session to be postponed. However, I never had a chance to present that defense, as I was sentenced during the third session. The judge said that “my article had incited the Kurds to fight.” I had written it after the end of the fighting.[157]

Sentencing of Activist for Speech at Funeral of Kurdish Leader

On April 2, 2006, the SSSC sentenced Riad Drar, a known activist and active member of the unauthorized Committees for Revival of Civil Society, to five years in prison on the basis of “belonging to a secret organization,”  “inciting sectarian strife,” and “spreading false information.” Security forces had arrested Drar on June 4, 2005 after he made a speech at the funeral of prominent Kurdish Islamic scholar Sheikh Muhammad Ma`shuq al-Khaznawi. In his speech, Drar demanded that the government grant Syrian Kurds the same rights as other citizens, particularly in regard to issues of citizenship for stateless Kurds.

Commenting on the trial and detention of Riad Drar, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention noted that:

[it] takes notice that the Government does not contest that the criminal charges were pressed against Mr. Al-Darrar because he hosted a public meeting, issued a communication and denounced a death in prison. These activities where held without violence and are rights protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights[…]

Furthermore, it is not contested that Mr. Al-Darrar’s detention was conducted without a warrant and that he was held in incommunicado detention for 25 days, that his lawyers were not permitted to have contact with him and that they were not given the pertaining documents of the case, and that he did not benefit from a fair and impartial trial, as the procedure before the SSSC is described.[158]

Sentencing of Four Activists Celebrating Nowruz

On February 3, 2008, the SSSC convicted four Kurdish activists on the basis of “acts, speech, writings or other means to cut off part of Syrian land to join it to another country.” The four are Hamid Suleiman Muhammad, Adnan Me`mech, Ibrahim Haj Yousef, and Ahmed Husayn Habash. Two of them, Hamid and Adnan, received ten years in jail while the other two, Ibrahim and Ahmed, received seven years. The four were part of a group that Syrian security services arrested in March 2006 for participating in a candle-lit procession in celebration of the Kurdish new year, Nowruz. The security forces had used tear gas and batons to break up the march.[159]

According to diplomats present at the trial, the SSSC accused them of attacking a troop of police that had come to repress the demonstration [160] While Human Rights Watch does not have information on whether the four had attacked the police, it notes that the SSSC sentenced them for acts meant to “cut off part of Syrian land to join it to another country” and not for attacks against the police.

E. Trial of Minors

Human Rights Watch has identified at least four defendants whom the SSSC has tried since 2005 who were not yet 18 at the time of the alleged commission of their offense. Under international law, children younger than 18 years can be subject to penal law procedures, but these procedures must be in full compliance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), to which Syria is a state party.[161] Recognizing the vulnerability and specificity of juveniles, Syrian law states that minors must be tried in special juvenile courts by judges who “have experience with juvenile issues.”[162]

Despite these international and local standards, the SSSC sentenced on February 4, 2007 three Syrian Kurds, Khibat Rashkilo, Sheikhmous Muhammad Kassem, and Mustapha Muhammad Ali, to two-and-a-half years in jail, even though the three were respectively 15, 16, and 17 when they committed their alleged offense in 2004.[163] While they were over 18 at the time of sentencing, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child—the body tasked with overseeing the implementation of the CRC—has stated that the special procedures for juvenile justice set forth in the CRC apply to all persons under age 18 at the time of the alleged offense, regardless of the individual’s age at the time of trial or sentencing.[164] Accordingly, the Syrian authorities should have tried these youths before specialized juvenile courts.

Almost two years prior to sentencing the three young Kurds, in June 2005, the SSSC sentenced another minor, Mus`ab al-Hariri, to six years in jail for belonging to the banned Muslim Brotherhood. Syrian security forces arrested him on July 24, 2002 shortly after he returned home to Syria with his mother from exile in Saudi Arabia where they had been since 1981. He was 14 at the time of arrest.[165]