Amir Huquq | Wasim al-Adawi
The announcement by the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in March 2025 of the establishment of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” signaled a major shift in Syria’s post-Baath political restructuring. At the same time, it continues to spark broad debate over the nature of this new body, the scope of its powers, and its legal and political implications.
According to a statement by Saad Baroud, Director of the International Organizations Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates, during the Civil Dialogue Day attended by Enab Baladi on November 15, 2025, the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” fills the vacuum left by the Baath Party, which had been associated with the former regime.
This publicly stated mandate raises far-reaching legal and political questions, particularly in light of the heavy legacy of the Baath Party, which for decades was linked to the former regime and dominated political life through constitutional and legal provisions that restricted pluralism and public freedoms.
Repurposing the party’s assets and former structures within a new entity, even under a different name, has fueled concerns that the “General Secretariat” could function as a de facto replacement for the Baath Party, or as a tool to reproduce its role in regulating the political sphere and controlling key state institutions and unions, albeit under a new institutional framework.
In this report, Enab Baladi examines the formation of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” from several angles. The first is legal, studying the framework under which it was established, its powers and limits. The second is political, exploring its impact on freedoms and political life, and whether its work is being shaped under the legacy of the Baath. The third discusses the direct implications of the “Secretariat” for Syrian civil society, in light of activists’ fears of a return to old forms of dominance through new mechanisms.
Enab Baladi attempted to contact the media office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates to inquire about the tasks and functioning of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” but received no response.
Legally: The “Secretariat” Leads the “State and Society”
Amid a transitional phase marked by the reshaping of Syria’s political and institutional landscape, the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” also known as the “Political Body,” has emerged as a new entity stirring wide legal and constitutional debate.
In his assessment of the establishment of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” known as the “Political Body,” lawyer and civil activist Ghazwan Koronfol said there is no legal or constitutional basis authorizing its creation. “There is only a decision issued by the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on March 27, 2025, No. 53, establishing it with the aim of organizing political work and tasks related to political affairs,” he told Enab Baladi.
However, this decision by Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Asaad al-Shibani does not constitute legislation that grants it the legal authority to exercise political activity at the national level, which is what it is effectively doing, according to Koronfol.
He added that the body has representatives across various governorates, “as if it has been designated as a single political reference, filling the political space in the absence of legislation allowing political parties to be formed in the country. Today, one could say that the Political Body is the ‘leader of the state and society,’ just as the Baath Party once was.”
As for its affiliation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Koronfol called the arrangement unusual, as such a structure is uncommon globally. “But I believe it is an attempt by Minister al-Shibani to build a civilian power base to counterbalance the dominant power current affiliated with the Ministry of Interior,” he said.
Meeting of the General Secretariat for Political Affairs, affiliated with the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in Damascus, chaired by the Secretariat’s Director Mohammad Kahaleh with directors of sub-directorates for political affairs across various governorates – October 17, 2025 (SANA)
Article “14” of the Syrian Constitutional Declaration:
- The state safeguards the right to political participation and the formation of parties on national foundations in accordance with a new law.
- The state guarantees the work of associations and unions.
An undeclared political party
The establishment came amid a vacuum in the public sphere following the decision to dissolve existing parties and ban the formation of new ones until legislation is issued to regulate them, according to Syrian lawyer Ghazwan Koronfol. He therefore interpreted the formation of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” as a preemptive attempt to seize control of the public space, occupy it, and “establish an octopus-like structure within state institutions that pledges loyalty to it before Syrian society reorganizes itself into party-based structures.”
He added that, in theory, the decisions of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” are administrative decisions, since they are issued by an administrative body, and therefore can be challenged before the administrative judiciary.
In practice, the “Secretariat” constitutes an undeclared political party that will certainly take on a permanent character. It is a dominant party without a clear party structure, according to the Syrian lawyer. For this reason, it is important to issue a political parties law that restructures the political body as a party independent from the administration, without granting it privileges over other parties merely because it is the party of the authority.
Repeating the “Baath” experience
Civil activist Koronfol believes that “the Baath experience is being repeated literally, but silently,” as he put it. “There are no clear limits or definitions regarding the role, mission, or powers of the General Secretariat for Political Affairs. Everything in this context is ambiguous, and the aim is to extend control over the state’s institutions and administrations so that power becomes permanent for the new regime.”
Regarding the assets of the dissolved Baath Party, which the “political body” has taken control of, Koronfol argued that these premises should revert to state ownership and be managed in the service of the state. The authority, or its offshoots such as the political body, have no right to use them as headquarters, because as a political entity it must be separate from the state and its property.
He stressed that these properties could be offered for investment, with revenues going into the state treasury.
The first party in Syria after the fall of the ousted Assad regime was established four days after its collapse. The Syrian Constitutional Party (Hadas) announced from its headquarters in Tartous (a coastal city in western Syria) the start of its public activities in Syria and the end of its “forced exile,” since its founding abroad in 2017. It called for its five principles: democracy, secularism, citizenship, development, and peace.
However, this announcement was not legally documented in Syria amid the continued absence of a political parties law and licensing framework.
Absence of legal basis
Dr. Mohammad al-Hussein, a professor of administrative law at Damascus University and the National Institute of Public Administration (INA), said that the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” affiliated with the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, lacks any legal basis. He explained that there is a wide gap between the powers legally granted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and those assigned to this “Secretariat.”
He noted that the creation of such a body can only take place through a law issued by the competent legislative authority. In contrast, the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” was established by an administrative decision issued by a minister who does not legally have the authority to make such a decision.
Merely creating a body of this nature and with such powers through an administrative decision constitutes a clear violation of the principle of legality, according to al-Hussein, and represents an explicit departure from the constitutional and legal frameworks in force in the state.
Violation of the Constitutional Declaration
Dr. al-Hussein added that any revolution that comes to power and succeeds in administering the state necessarily requires that political powers fall under the authority of the head of state, or at least the Council of Ministers under his leadership, especially in the case of a legislative vacuum.
This measure, namely the establishment of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” by a decision of the Syrian Foreign Minister, does not comply with the principle of separation of powers or the provisions of the Constitutional Declaration, which explicitly stipulates that the government must operate within existing laws and legislation unless they are amended or repealed according to constitutional procedures, as al-Hussein explained.
Bypassing these rules undermines the principle of the rule of law, according to al-Hussein, and sets dangerous administrative precedents that could open the door to legislative and regulatory chaos within state institutions.
Article “51” of the Syrian Constitutional Declaration:
Existing laws shall remain in force unless amended or repealed.
Overlapping tasks with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Dr. Mohammad al-Hussein further clarified that the powers of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” are far removed from the nature of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates’ legally defined mandate. He argued that it would have been more appropriate to establish an independent body to oversee or invest the assets of the dissolved Baath Party.
He considered attaching this type of work to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be entirely inconsistent with the laws and regulations governing the ministry, whose mandate is exclusively to manage foreign relations and diplomatic affairs.
According to al-Hussein, this overlap in competencies reflects poor administrative organization, which weakens the role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and distorts its core function.
Managing Baath Party assets and investment mechanisms
The Syrian administrative law expert indicated that the movable and immovable assets of the dissolved Baath Party should be placed in a special fund under the supervision of a competent authority, and invested in a way that achieves social justice and serves the public interest of the state.
If the goal behind establishing the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” is merely coordination, al-Hussein said, then a general secretariat could have been formed within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates, or a specialized technical department created to handle training, capacity-building, and the organization of diplomatic work.
He stressed that the Syrian Foreign Minister should not lead domestic political work in the state, as this would constitute a clear violation of laws and constitutional norms.
“General Secretariat”: Coordinating work between state institutions
In October 2025, Mohammad Kahala, Director of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” held a coordination meeting that included directors of sub-directorates for political affairs in various provinces. The meeting aimed to enhance institutional integration and improve government performance, according to the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA).
During the meeting, a comprehensive review was conducted of the work of the Secretariat’s directorates over the previous period, highlighting key achievements and challenges. Future plans and mechanisms for their implementation in line with national orientations were discussed, along with ways to coordinate work between government institutions.
Kahala stressed the importance of unifying efforts and exchanging expertise between directorates, emphasizing that the coming phase requires intensified work and improved performance to meet citizens’ aspirations and strengthen trust in official institutions.
Throughout 2025, the “Secretariat” held numerous meetings, including with Christian religious leaders in Syria and Lebanon, and a number of women activists in Damascus and its countryside. It also conducted field visits to its directorates and to provinces such as Damascus, Idlib (northwestern Syria), and Aleppo (northern Syria). Notably, a delegation from the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” participated in a visit to the Churches Complex in Old Damascus on the occasion of Easter in 2025.
Meeting between Mohammad Kahala, Director of the General Secretariat for Political Affairs, and Ahmed Mowaffaq Zidan, Media Adviser to the Presidency of the Republic, at the Secretariat’s headquarters in Damascus, 25 September 2025 (SANA)
Political activity violates civil service neutrality
Political activity is prohibited within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, according to administrative law expert Mohammad al-Hussein. Legally, it is confined to political parties and the People’s Assembly, provided that laws are issued to regulate party work in line with the national context and the state’s overall political direction.
Allowing political activity inside a sovereign ministry such as Syria’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates constitutes a violation of the principle of civil service neutrality and undermines the professionalism of the diplomatic corps.
The Syrian academic stressed that political life should be organized through clear legislative frameworks and specialized institutions, not through individual administrative decisions.
Oversight problem and the supervising authority
Dr. Mohammad al-Hussein questioned which body would monitor the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” and which oversight agencies would be tasked with supervising its work and holding it accountable.
If such a “Secretariat” is to be established, it should be formed by a direct order from the President of the Republic and linked to him directly, as the state’s supreme political leader, not to the foreign minister.
The administrative law academic considered that the absence of a clear oversight authority increases the danger posed by this “Secretariat” and places it outside the framework of accountability.
“It should have been an independent body, formed through a legal text issued by the President of the Republic, based on the principles of good governance and the rule of law,” al-Hussein said.
The administrative law expert also asserted that it is practically impossible to impose effective oversight on a political body with such broad powers, arguing that it would become larger than all other state institutions.
He explained that the risk lies in the fact that it is tasked with political work, which would place it above accountability unless it is strictly regulated by binding legal provisions.
Legality of the decision and its susceptibility to appeal
Dr. al-Hussein believes the foreign minister’s decision to establish the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” is unlawful and can be challenged before the administrative judiciary.
He added that the decision does not comply with the provisions of the Constitutional Declaration, and that the body should have been affiliated with the Presidency of the Republic or the General Secretariat of the Presidency.
From a legal standpoint, he said the decision is void. Under no circumstances can the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” be created through a decision issued by the foreign minister. Al-Hussein concluded by stressing that “the gap is vast between the powers of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and those granted to this ‘Secretariat,’ which can only be established by law, yet was created through an administrative decision issued by a minister who does not have the legal authority to take such a step.”
A threat to civil society independence
At the civil society level, the decision raised broad concerns among activists, who view the “General Secretariat” as a direct threat to the independence of their work. They fear that the expansion of the “Secretariat’s” powers could impose political guardianship over civil society organizations and restrict their activities under regulatory or sovereignty-related pretexts, reproducing patterns of interference and control that prevailed under the former regime.
Civil activist George Talamas said there is a clear overlap of responsibilities, particularly regarding associations and civil organizations. He argued that the “Secretariat’s” role conflicts with the mandate of the Ministry of Social Affairs, creating a lack of transparency, unclear legal reference points, and fears of selective interference in civil society activities.
He noted that implementation varies by region. While Damascus and Aleppo enjoy some freedom, other areas such as the coast and Idlib (northwestern Syria) see extensive interference affecting civil and political activity, including requirements for prior approvals for seminars, training sessions, and presented content.
Talamas said this is not “regulation,” but rather the imposition of guardianship over civil and political life, which runs counter to what the revolution sought in terms of freedom for parties and civil society.
He stressed that the solution lies in opening a genuine national dialogue and establishing a social contract and constitution that protect freedom of opinion, assembly, and party formation, and place civil society in its natural position within the public sphere, away from control by a single entity or a return to the one-party model.
“The interference of the General Secretariat for Political Affairs varies by region. While Damascus and Aleppo enjoy some degree of freedom, other areas, such as the coast and Idlib, see significant interference that extends to civil society and political activities.”
George Talamas
Civil activist
Obstacles shrinking civil society’s capacity
Feminist and political activist Sawsan Zakzak, a board member of the Syrian Women’s League, said the work of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” has a significant impact on civil society in Syria. She stressed that civil society is not merely charitable work, but is directly concerned with political, social, and human rights issues in Syria.
The presence of the “General Secretariat” creates obstacles for the activities of unions and women’s organizations, including workshops and seminars, reducing these institutions’ ability to play their political and social role, she said.
She warned that interference by the “General Secretariat” could lead to bans on work related to democracy, or refusals to grant necessary approvals.
The women’s movement pays particular attention to the constitution and gender rights, Zakzak said, arguing that any constitution that is not gender-sensitive will negatively affect women’s gains, especially on issues such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and lifting reservations on it.
Zakzak added that the “General Secretariat’s” interference in political parties or election laws could lead to the creation of parties affiliated with the authority or restrictions on party activity, directly affecting civil society and the women’s movement’s ability to participate in decision-making.
She said the solution is to abolish the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” and enact a modern associations law that guarantees freedom of establishment, civil work, and access to funding, with clear oversight mechanisms, drawing on models adopted in the region.
What is the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs”?
The Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced the creation of a new section within its structure under the name “General Secretariat for Political Affairs,” “based on the requirements of political work, within the process of developing and modernizing work structures and political efficiency in the new phase, and strengthening official institutions.”
In a statement published on 28 March 2025, the ministry said the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” would participate in drafting and shaping policies and general plans related to political affairs. It would also work to reallocate the assets of the dissolved Arab Socialist Baath Party and the parties of the former National Progressive Front and their affiliates, in a way that serves “political and national tasks and responsibilities.”
A panel from the “Civil Society Dialogue Day,” attended by representatives of the Syrian government, 15 November 2025 (Enab Baladi, Amir Huquq)
New guardianship over political life?
The establishment of the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” has sparked broad debate in Syrian political circles, as it is seen as a pivotal development in how political life is managed after the dissolution of the Baath Party.
Its creation has also raised concerns that tasks such as “shaping policies” and “defining political and national responsibilities” could become tools to restrict political activity and to redefine what is “acceptable” or “unacceptable” in the public sphere.
Between those who view it as an organizational step in line with the new phase, and those who see it as a repackaging of old instruments of control, questions are intensifying about the nature of this entity, the limits of its roles, and its implications for the future of pluralism, freedoms, and political and civil action in Syria.
Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shibani said during a discussion seminar at Chatham House in London on 13 November 2025 that “the new Syrian experience seeks to be a model of pluralistic governance, and its success depends on coexistence, building trust, and rejecting sectarianism that the former regime used to sow.”
He pointed to efforts to “strengthen pluralism” in the government, ministries, and society, preserve an institutional culture, and repair the constitution and laws in a measured way.
Dominance over political and social space
Ammar Jello, a researcher at the Hewar Center for Research and Studies in Washington (Washington, DC), offered a critical reading of the statements circulating about the role of the “General Secretariat” and the nature of the ongoing political transformations. He stressed that the problem is not about replacing the Baath Party with another person or entity, but rather about substituting Article 8 of the 1973 constitution, which enshrined the Baath Party as the leader of the state and society.
He noted that control over Syrian society was not the result of one party’s dominance as much as it was imposed by a constitutional text that provided this dominance with legal cover.
Jello said the decision related to the work of the “Political Secretariat” made it dominant over both political and social space, while tying it to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which he described as “dangerous” because it transfers the exercise of influence from the external sphere to the internal one.
The real purpose of these arrangements remains unclear, despite talk of preparing the scene for the establishment of a presidential party to contest elections. Still, he suggested that the “Political Secretariat” is not necessarily operating in that direction, noting that parties of power are often created outside traditional frameworks and are not concerned with building prior political foundations.
He argued that what is happening reflects a continuation of dominance, alongside competition among currents within the new authority. One of these currents, he said, seeks social control. He added that this may be linked to the weak military background of some figures coming from civilian backgrounds, making the issue of embedding influence in Syrian society, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ connection to it, extremely risky.
The Baath Party, a formal dissolution and a continuing presence
In political experiences, dissolving dominant parties does not necessarily mean their roles or functions end. Often, these roles continue in new forms or through different institutions. This raises the question of whether the Syrian scene is witnessing a real break with the Baath Party’s legacy, or merely a formal change in structure while the political essence remains the same.
Executive power’s interference in the details of political and social life is a sensitive indicator of the political system’s nature and its future direction. With growing complaints about the “General Secretariat for Political Affairs” intervening across multiple fields, this reality raises questions about its political meaning.
The Arab Socialist Baath Party was founded in the Syrian capital, Damascus, on 7 April 1947 by Syrian thinker and writer Michel Aflaq, politician Salah al-Din al-Bitar, and Zaki al-Arsuzi. Its ideology blended Arab nationalism and Arab socialism. Its branches spread to several countries, but it held power only in Syria and Iraq.
On 11 December 2024, Ibrahim al-Hadid, the party’s assistant secretary-general, announced, three days after the fall of the Assad regime, the suspension of the party’s work and activities “until further notice,” after 61 years of Baath rule in Syria. The party’s assets and funds were initially placed under the oversight and supervision of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Justice, with revenues transferred to the Central Bank of Syria, and vehicles transferred to the Ministry of Interior.
Over decades in power, the Baath Party in Syria relied on centralized, repressive policies aimed at controlling all state and societal levers. These policies included:
- Monopolizing political power, one-party control of political life.
- Restricting public freedoms, banning independent political gatherings and monitoring civil society.
- Controlling resources and institutions, placing state property and public facilities under party control.
Fears of entrenching authoritarianism
Ammar Jello said the governing framework in the first phase was built on a principle of intervening in everything, as approval from the political body was required for any activity, and any community movement with a political character was forced to obtain prior permission.
This approach, he said, leads in some areas to obstructing activities, and in others to banning them entirely. He considered this an obstruction of any chance to build a Syrian political society in the post-authoritarian state phase. He said this issue should have been clearly regulated and codified, yet it did not receive sufficient debate.
“A lack of active political life in society leads to the entrenchment of authoritarianism, along with political and economic underdevelopment and a broader state of stagnation.”
Ammar Jello
Researcher at the Hewar Center for Research and Studies
According to Jello, the issue of freedoms appeared in the texts as closer to rhetorical clauses, but in practice it has come in a very negative form. He pointed to information he heard about some seminars being banned or denied licenses on the pretext of complicated procedures, which he described as a narrowing of freedoms that nearly kills them.
Politically, he said, the result is the reproduction of authoritarianism. It always begins by pressuring society and any political life within it, which in turn restarts the cycle of authoritarianism.
From the “Civil Society Dialogue Day” seminars, attended by representatives of the Syrian government, 15 November 2025 (Enab Baladi, Amir Huquq)
Political life in Syria
After gaining independence on 17 April 1946, Syria experienced an active political and party life marked by democracy and freedom of opinion and expression. Political currents ranged from the far right to the far left, and parties at the time were able to play their political role despite military coups. The Syrian parliament was a symbol of these parties’ role and activity.
Political parties operated freely on the national scene, with their activity protected under laws and the constitution. Among the most prominent parties in that period were the Socialist Cooperative Party, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Syrian Communist Party, the Arab Socialist Baath Party, and the People’s Party and the National Party, which emerged from the split of the National Bloc formed in 1926 to resist French colonial rule.
With the union between Syria and Egypt in 1958, Syrian parties were restricted and security services tightened their grip on party work and activity, in an attempt to pave the way for one-man rule and separate politics from society. After the Arab Socialist Baath Party coup in 1963, Hafez al-Assad reached power through military authority after carrying out a coup on 16 November 1970.
The Baath Party began eliminating political parties, and some shifted to underground activity. However, harsh repression prevented these parties from spreading or exerting influence. To fully eradicate them, Hafez al-Assad created what was known as the National Progressive Front, which led parties opposing Baath policies, such as communists and Arab nationalists, to withdraw, and their opponents were subsequently pursued.
The era of the Arab Socialist Baath Party ended with the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime on 8 December 2024. On 29 January 2025, the “General Command” announced the dissolution of the ruling Baath Party in Syria under the former regime, as well as the parties of the National Progressive Front and their affiliated organizations, institutions, and committees. It also banned their re-establishment under any other name and ordered that all their assets be returned to the Syrian state.
Despite the political change Syria witnessed after the fall of the Assad regime, from the “Victory Conference” through the “National Dialogue” conference, followed by the Constitutional Declaration for the transitional phase, the political landscape remains devoid of political parties amid the absence of a dedicated law regulating party activity and defining its nature.
A law governing political parties cannot be issued without a legislative council, which remains inactive despite the election of two-thirds of its members through a representative process in November 2025.
The post “The Political Secretariat” Engineering the Post Baath Order appeared first on Enab Baladi.