Syrian Legislative Decree No. 66 of 2012: From a Tool of Repression to a Challenge for Transitional Justice Comprehensive Introduction Eleven months after the fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime, Legislative Decree No. 66, issued on September 18, 2012, represents a stark example of exploiting domestic legislation as a tool for repression and demographic change. This decree, titled "Establishing Two Regulatory Zones in Damascus Governorate," transcended its declared regulatory purposes to become a systematic tool for forced displacement and the erasure of the community identity of opposition areas. Today, the new Syrian government faces a complex legal and humanitarian legacy that tests its ability to transition from a state of repression to a state of law. Historical Context and Intent Analysis The decree was issued at the peak of the armed conflict in 2012, selectively targeting areas in the Damascus countryside such as Al-Hajar Al-Aswad, Jobar, Qadam, and Asali, which were strongholds of armed opposition movements. A temporal and geographical analysis of the decree reveals hidden intentions beyond the declared regulatory purposes: Strategic Timing: The decree was issued during the most intense period of the conflict, raising questions about the priority of urban planning legislation under wartime conditions. Geographical Targeting: It focused on opposition strongholds, ignoring other informal areas with similar characteristics but with a loyalist demographic composition. Deliberate Ambiguity: The decree left terms like "informal areas" and "violations" undefined, allowing for selective application. International Legal Framework and Grave Violations First: Within the Framework of International Humanitarian Law: The decree violated fundamental principles of international humanitarian law: Violation of the Prohibition of Forced Displacement: The displacement resulting from the decree constitutes a violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the individual or collective forcible transfer of civilians. Destruction of Property Without Military Necessity: The regime failed to provide convincing justifications for the military necessity requiring the widespread destruction of residential areas, contrary to Article 53 of the same convention. Demographic Change as a War Crime: Deliberate demographic change can amount to a war crime under the Rome Statute. Second: Within the Framework of Human Rights Law: The decree violated fundamental human rights: Right to Adequate Housing: It deprived residents of their homes without providing suitable alternatives, violating the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Right to Property: The deprivation of property constituted a violation of Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Right to Participation: It deprived residents of the right to participate in decisions affecting their communities. Transformation into Investment Projects: From Displacement to Replacement The decree evolved into the "Marota City" and "Basilia City" projects, which represented: Completion of the Displacement Process: By transforming popular neighborhoods into luxury projects unaffordable to the original inhabitants. Consolidation of Demographic Change: By attracting new social and economic segments different from the original population. Legitimization of the Outcomes: By converting confiscated areas into "legal" real estate investments. Current Challenges Facing the New Government The new Syrian government faces significant challenges in addressing this file: Legal Challenges: · Complexity of property ownership and overlapping rights · Existence of investors and financial rights acquired by third parties · Difficulty of proof due to the destruction of official records Practical Challenges: · The massive scale of destruction in targeted areas · The dispersal of residents and the diversity of their current places of residence · Limited financial resources for compensation and reconstruction programs Societal Challenges: · The depth of psychological and social wounds · Diversity of viewpoints among affected parties · Difficulty in achieving reconciliation while ensuring the restoration of rights Comprehensive Roadmap for Addressing the Decree: Proposed Implementation Mechanisms Addressing the legacy of Decree 66 represents a practical test for the new government. Here are integrated treatment mechanisms that can be adopted: Phase One: Emergency Measures and Immediate Halt (0-6 Months) Urgent Legislative Action: Issue a law abolishing Decree 66 and freezing all real estate transactions in the affected areas. Urgent Administrative Action: Immediate halt to all ongoing demolition and construction work, and formation of an emergency ministerial committee for coordination. Urgent Judicial Action: Suspend the execution of evacuation orders and open rapid channels for receiving complaints from affected persons. Phase Two: Documentation and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (6-18 Months) Comprehensive Documentation Mechanisms: Establish a "National Registry of Those Affected by Decree 66" and utilize modern technologies such as historical satellite imagery and field documentation teams. Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Resolution Mechanisms: Establish specialized judicial circuits to adjudicate property disputes related to the decree, with a reduced burden of proof on affected persons and recourse to community mediation mechanisms. Categorization Mechanisms: Classify cases into categories (owner able to prove ownership, owner whose land is occupied by projects, owner unable to prove ownership) and offer different solutions for each category. Phase Three: Implementation and Reparation Mechanisms (18-36 Months) Mechanisms for Restoring Rights: Establish a "Compensation Fund for the Affected" with mixed funding, and offer multiple forms of compensation (cash, housing units, loans). Mechanisms for Reconciliation and Transitional Justice: Establish a "Truth and Accountability Commission" for public investigation, and launch symbolic projects to preserve collective memory. International Mechanisms and Technical Support: Seek assistance from international experts in transitional justice and link compensation programs to local development plans. Conclusion: A Test of Credibility for the New Era Addressing the legacy of Decree 66 represents a crucial test of the credibility of the new Syrian government and its ability to achieve a genuine transition from a state of repression to a state of law. The issue is not merely about restoring properties, but rather: A Test of Commitment to Human Rights: And the new state's ability to protect the rights of its citizens. A Measure of Transitional Justice: And the state's efficiency in addressing the legacy of violations. A Foundation for National Reconciliation: And an indispensable prerequisite for building the future Syria. How the new government handles this file will not only determine its credibility locally and internationally but will also shape the foundations upon which the future Syria will be built: a Syria of law, justice, and human dignity. Dr:M.Nedal Khalouf Generations and Technology University