The Syrian Network for Human Rights (SNHR) released an analytical legal report in May 2026 examining the trial of Brigadier General Atef Najib, the former head of the Political Security. Branch in Daraa. The trial is the first national criminal proceeding in post-regime Syria against a senior Assad security figure. SNHR’s report highlights several legal and procedural loopholes in the case.
Legislative gaps – no war crimes or crimes against humanity in Syrian law
The Syrian Penal Code does not define war crimes or crimes against humanity as independent legal categories. Conduct attributed to Najib — systematic killing, torture, arbitrary detention, and persecution of civilians — fits Article 7 of the Rome Statute for crimes against humanity. But charges will likely be filed under ordinary criminal provisions like murder, torture, and abuse of authority.
SNHR says this is “not a matter of judicial discretion, but rather a direct consequence of the absence of legislative text.” Any judgment “will be unable to reflect the systematic and widespread nature of the crimes”.
Problems with legal characterization of crimes
Najib was indicted for war crimes, but legal observers noted the Syrian conflict wasn’t labeled as an “armed conflict” until 2012, after Najib’s tenure as head of political security in Daraa ended. Enforced disappearance and persecution were omitted from the indictment, though observers said “that doesn’t mean they are errors that cannot be rectified”.
Theoretical basis of individual responsibility
SNHR’s report says the trial reveals loopholes in “the theoretical basis of individual responsibility”. Najib held “direct and joint leadership responsibility for systematic acts that targeted civilians including killing, torture and arbitrary detention”. But without command responsibility or joint criminal enterprise doctrines codified in Syrian law, linking senior officials to systematic crimes is harder.
Trial guarantees and procedural issues
In-absentia proceedings: 8 other defendants, including Bashar al-Assad and Maher al-Assad, are being tried in absentia. The court declared them fugitives and placed assets under state administration per Article 322 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. SNHR flags loopholes in “procedural guarantees of the in-absentia trial”. Human Rights Watch and legal experts argued the trial is “premature” because Syria lacks a transitional justice legal framework. Joumana Seif, former member of Syria’s National Commission for Transitional Justice, said trials should have been postponed until the People’s Assembly issued a law establishing “a clear legal framework… that establishes a solid foundation for all future trials”.
Harmonization with international law
Lawyers noted it’s harder to try perpetrators based on treaties rather than domestic law. Seif said harmonizing Syrian laws is “the ideal situation” because judges applying Syrian law is “certainly easier than going back to check this or that treaty”.
On 10 May 2026, Judge Fakhr al-Din al-Aryan read charges that Najib oversaw “excessive use of force” against peaceful protesters in Daraa in early 2011. Allegations include arrest/torture of children for “political writings on walls,” suppressing protests with “excessive force,” firing on a sit-in at Daraa’s Al-Omari mosque, and “torture leading to death” in detention centers.First session: Held 26 April 2026 in Damascus Fourth Criminal Court. Najib appeared in person. 50 plaintiffs were registered as civil parties.
SNHR’s broader work also notes systemic flaws in Syrian justice, lack of judicial warrants, fair trial violations, and laws granting immunity to security services.