In an unprecedented step taken by law, the Paris Court of Appeal shook the pillars of international diplomacy by issuing an arrest warrant against the head of the Syrian regime, Bashar al-Assad, and three of his senior aides.
This historic decision, which accuses al-Assad of complicity in committing crimes against humanity in the deadly chemical attacks which took place in August 2013, represents a radical shift in the concept of diplomatic immunity for heads of state. This decision came as a result of the tireless efforts made by victims’ lawyers and non-governmental organizations. It has significant legal and political implications which cannot be ignored, given that al-Assad committed crimes against humanity in the deadly chemical attacks in 2013 in Eastern Ghouta in the Damascus countryside. These attacks have claimed the lives of 1,144. They have also suffocated about six thousand people.
The issuing of an international arrest warrant against Bashar al-Assad and three other officials, including Maher al-Assad, on charges of complicity in crimes against humanity, constitutes a strong blow to the Syrian regime. Although this decision will not lead to al-Assad being dragged by his ears to prison, yet it weakens him and limits his ability to move freely. He can no longer travel freely or be welcomed in countries which respect justice and human rights.
The court order establishes an important judicial precedence of seizing the principle of personal immunity for heads of states even when they hold office. This challenges the traditional concept of diplomatic immunity enshrined in the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
The decision reinforces the principle of universal jurisdiction, allowing national courts to prosecute perpetrators of serious international crimes regardless of where they were committed or the nationality of their perpetrators.
It also represents an important step towards combating impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity, which may encourage other national courts to take similar actions.
The decision increases the diplomatic isolation of the Syrian regime, and places additional obstacles to any attempts to normalize relations with it.
It may also affect the course of political negotiations in Syria, as it is difficult to ignore the legal accusations directed at the head of the regime in any future political solution. It also puts countries seeking rapprochement with Syria in a critical position which could lead to diplomatic tensions between France and countries supporting the Syrian regime.
The decision gives a moral boost to the Syrian opposition and strengthens its position in international forums.
Despite the symbolic importance of the decision, the possibility of its implementation remains limited as long as al-Assad remains in power and under the protection of his allies.
This Paris court decision may also lead to a hardening of the positions of the Syrian regime and its allies, which may complicate efforts to reach a political solution.
It also raises questions about the limits of the authority of national courts in dealing with issues of international dimensions.
The Paris court order represents an important turning point in the legal and political dealing with the Syrian crisis. It opens the door to new developments in the field of international justice and diplomacy. However, its practical impact remains dependent on the extent of the international community’s ability to translate it into concrete steps on the ground.
[by Ahmad Zakariya in Syria TV]
Compiled and translated by Faizul Haque