The Netherlands has announced plans to hold Syria to account for its alleged human rights violations. On 18 September 2020, Foreign Minister Stef Blok told parliament that the Assad regime had “crack[ed] down hard on its own population, using torture and chemical weapons, and bombing hospitals.” In response, the Dutch government has requested negotiation by way of a diplomatic note handed to Syrian officials in Geneva. The note invokes Syria’s international obligations under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT), including its responsibility to cease violations and compensate all victims. According to article 30, paragraph 1 of the convention, negotiation between the states is a necessary first step for dispute settlement. Should negotiation fail, the Netherlands has the option to submit the case to arbitration. If arbitration is also unsuccessful, the case can be referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
ATTEMPTS TO HOLD SYRIA TO ACCOUNT
The Dutch initiative is not the first attempt to hold Syria to account. International efforts to bring Syrian officials to justice have not always been successful. In May 2014, Russia and China vetoed a UN Security Council Resolution to refer the Syrian conflict to the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, recent years have seen several European governments attempt to hold the Assad regime to account. In 2019, a joint initiative of French and German authorities led to the arrest of Anwar Raslan and Eyad Gharib, alleged members of Assad’s intelligence services who had defected from the regime and claimed asylum in Europe. Additionally, Germany has been able to initiate proceedings under its universal jurisdiction laws, which allow for the prosecution of serious crimes – including genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes – regardless of where they were committed and whether German nationals were involved. The trial, which began in April of this year, is the world’s first trial relating to state torture in Syria since the conflict began almost a decade ago. Following the arrest of Raslan and Gharib, accountability efforts have accelerated: over the past two years, criminal complaints against Syrian officials have been filed in a number of European countries, including Norway, Sweden and Austria. War crimes perpetrated by other Syrian fighters, such as members of the Islamic State, are also being targeted across parts of Europe. One alleged victim of torture at the al-Khatib detention facility said that ongoing proceedings “give […] survivors hope for justice”.
RESPONSES AND NEXT STEPS
Responses to the Netherlands’ initiative have been mixed. According to Roger Lu Phillips, legal director at the Syria Justice and Accountability Centre, it is important to manage expectations considering that the ICJ cannot impose criminal sanctions and victims’ testimonies are unlikely to be heard. However, should the court find that Syria has a state policy of torture it may pave the way for other states to impose sanctions. It may also contribute to build the case for the extradition of Assad and his officials in the future. For Mai El-Sadany,managing director at the Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy, “the very process of signalling an intent to bring this case” brings about a form of accountability for the Assad regime. Ultimately, the Netherlands’ attempt to hold Syria responsible for its human rights violations is a welcome one. In the words of Stef Blok to Dutch parliament, “the Assad regime has committed horrific crimes time after time. The evidence is overwhelming. There must be consequences.”
Miranda is a GDL student and Gray's Inn scholar. After graduating from the University of Oxford with a Modern Languages degree, she completed the Teach First programme. She now hopes to pursue a career at the Bar.