The Syrian Network for Human Rights issued a report assessing the first two hearings in the trial of Atef Najib, who headed the Political Security Branch in Daraa (southern Syria) at the beginning of the Syrian revolution.
The Network said in its report, issued Sunday, July 19, that the two hearings, held on April 26 and May 10,demonstrated a notable degree of openness and organization.
However, the public and organized nature of the proceedings did not prevent fundamental procedural and legal issues from remaining unresolved and requiring attention during later stages, according to the Syrian Network for Human Rights.
The Network said the hearings showed positive elements related to transparency, organization, and procedural sequencing, alongside key issues requiring further scrutiny, particularly the presumption of innocence, defense rights, trials in absentia, witness protection measures, and the precise use of legal characterizations.
It stressed that any final assessment of the trial’s compliance with fair trial standards would depend on monitoring later stages, particularly the questioning of the defendant, the hearing of witnesses, the presentation and examination of evidence, and whether the defense is effectively able to exercise its rights.
The Network explained that the document was a judicial monitoring report, not a report assigning guilt or a judgment on the truth of the alleged facts, the sufficiency of the evidence, or the individual criminal responsibility of any defendant.
Its scope was also limited to monitoring what occurred during the public portions of the two hearings and what was stated by the court, the public prosecution, and the parties to the case inside the courtroom. It did not include an independent assessment of the case file or evidence that was not presented publicly.
Content of the Two Hearings
The Syrian Network for Human Rights said the first hearing was preparatory and procedural. It did not include questioning the defendant, who was present, discussing the merits of the case, or presenting evidence.
The monitoring team observed that the hearing was held publicly and attended by representatives of local and international media, human rights organizations, lawyers representing the plaintiffs, and defense counsel for the defendant. The team did not observe any apparent restrictions on attendees entering the courtroom or following the proceedings.
The second hearing, held on May 10, marked the case’s transition from the preliminary procedural stage to the presentation of a summary of the charges and the grounds for the prosecution.
The report observed that the court and public prosecution referred to provisions of Syrian law and rules and principles of international law, including the right to life, the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment, the right to liberty, and children’s rights. They also referred to international legal characterizations, including crimes against humanity and war crimes.
The Network stressed that documenting these characterizations did not mean endorsing them or determining whether they applied. Classifying acts as war crimes requires specific legal and contextual elements, including the existence of an armed conflict and a sufficient connection between the alleged acts and that conflict.
Prosecution Allegations Should Not Be Conclusive
The Syrian Network for Human Rights said the prosecutor presented the prosecution’s account of events in Daraa Governorate in 2011. The prosecutor said the events began with the arrest of children over writings on walls, followed, according to the prosecution, by torture, harsh treatment, and the suppression of peaceful protests.
The prosecution also attributed command, security, and political responsibilities to several defendants and linked them to a military and security chain of command. It argued that the alleged events formed a systematic pattern of violations amounting, in the prosecution’s view, to crimes against humanity, war crimes, and offenses punishable under Syrian law.
According to the Network, the monitoring team observed that some language used in the presentation of the charges and the prosecution’s submissions appeared declarative or conclusive.
The Network noted that procedural integrity requires such statements to be understood exclusively as a presentation of the prosecution’s allegations, not as a final judicial conclusion reached before the evidence has been examined and the defense has presented its arguments.
The Network’s monitoring team also noted that the court announced the defense lawyer’s right to receive and review a copy of the summary of charges. While this was an important measure, the adequacy of this safeguard would depend on whether the defense is later given sufficient time, relevant materials, and a meaningful opportunity to challenge the evidence and witnesses and respond to the allegations against the defendant.
Conditions for Witness Protection
The Syrian Network for Human Rights said the court announced, before questioning the defendant, that some questions could involve documents and the names of witnesses covered by protection measures.
The court ordered the suspension of the livestream and asked media representatives to leave, while allowing some attendees to remain in the courtroom. It said recordings would be published later after the names of witnesses, documents, and sensitive information had been removed.
The Network said witness protection measures could be legitimate if they remained specific, necessary, and proportionate, and did not unjustifiably infringe on defense rights or the principle of a public trial.
National and International Laws Must Not Be Conflated
The Syrian Network for Human Rights said the legal framework presented during the hearings and in the report relied on Syrian law and international human rights law, particularly the right to life, the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment, guarantees of liberty and a fair trial, and children’s rights.
The Convention Against Torture, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, rules of international humanitarian law, and the Geneva Conventions were also raised during the hearing, along with international criminal characterizations such as crimes against humanity and war crimes.
The Network stressed the need not to conflate human rights violations, crimes established under national law, and international crimes, which require separate legal and contextual elements.
Recommendations
The Syrian Network for Human Rights called on the Fourth Criminal Court in Damascus to maintain a clear distinction between the presentation of charges and any language that could be understood as prejudging criminal responsibility. It also called for the presumption of innocence to be respected throughout the trial.
The Network called on the court and public prosecution to use precise and clearly attributed language when presenting alleged facts and legal characterizations, particularly when referring to international crimes.
It also called for the defense to be granted effective access to the summary of charges, evidence, and relevant documents, as well as sufficient time to prepare, respond, and examine witnesses and evidence.
The Network recommended limiting any restrictions on public access, broadcasting, or media attendance to what is necessary to protect witnesses or sensitive information. It said such measures should not unjustifiably undermine defense rights or the principle of public oversight of the trial.
It called on the court and the relevant judicial authorities to clarify the safeguards available to defendants being tried in absentia, particularly regarding effective notification, the right to appeal, and the possibility of a retrial or review of the proceedings under the law if they later appear or can be properly notified.
The Network also called on bodies responsible for witness protection to continue withholding unnecessary identifying information and to refrain from publishing names, documents, or details that could endanger witnesses, plaintiffs, or their families.
Atef Najib’s Trial
Five hearings have been held in the trial of Atef Najib since proceedings began on April 26.
The fifth hearing was held on July 14 and was devoted to hearing prosecution witnesses, in the presence of international, human rights, and legal organizations.
The next hearing is scheduled for July 21 as part of Syria’s transitional justice process.
Najib’s trial is part of a series of proceedings against former regime figures, including Wassim al-Assad, a cousin of former President Bashar al-Assad, and former Grand Mufti Ahmad Hassoun.
The post Human Rights Report Assesses First Two Hearings in Atef Najib Trial appeared first on Enab Baladi.