Enab Baladi – Wasim al-Adawi
The amnesty decree issued by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa on February 18 has sparked widespread debate among Syrian legal experts and human rights lawyers over its legality and constitutionality, particularly given that it was issued by a transitional authority. The controversy has intensified over the legitimacy of granting such a broad amnesty at this stage.
Several lawyers expressed concern that sweeping amnesty decisions could undermine the path toward justice and accountability, especially in a country emerging from a prolonged conflict. Much of the debate has centered on fears that the decree could include figures and affiliates of the former regime who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity against Syrians.
Under the decree, the Minister of Justice instructed public prosecutors to implement it immediately. In Aleppo, Public Prosecutor Ahmad Abd al-Rahman al-Mohammad issued directives to referral judges, criminal court judges, investigative judges, and public prosecutors to take the necessary legal measures and apply the amnesty in line with the ministry’s guidance, with the stated aim of achieving justice and fairness within the legal framework.
Judicial bodies began implementing Legislative Decree No. 39 of 2026, which grants a general amnesty for crimes committed prior to its issuance. Acting on directives from the Minister of Justice, judicial staff initiated immediate procedures upon receiving presidential instructions.
Implementation mechanisms included reviewing legal files and completing documentation for detainees covered by the amnesty in preparation for their lawful release, according to a timeline described as swift and institutionally organized, ensuring proper legal enforcement of the decree.
Syrian Constitutional Declaration
Article 39 of the Syrian Constitutional Declaration states:
The President of the Republic has the right to propose laws. The President issues laws approved by the People’s Assembly and may object to them with a reasoned decision within one month of receiving them from the Assembly, which must reconsider the law. If the law is reapproved by a two-thirds majority, the President is obliged to issue it.Article 40 states that the President of the Republic has the right to grant special amnesty and restore civil rights.
Anwar al-Bunni: The law has been trampled
Prominent Syrian lawyer and human rights activist Anwar al-Bunni said the Constitutional Declaration issued by al-Sharaa did not grant such authority to the transitional president, describing that omission as a positive aspect.
In a post on Facebook, al-Bunni argued that al-Sharaa’s violation of the Constitutional Declaration he himself drafted, and his assumption of powers not granted to him, represents a dangerous indicator of bypassing the “rule of law” that is frequently invoked in official discourse.
According to al-Bunni, the amnesty decree serves as a warning that the law has been placed “underfoot” and holds no value, which he said does not bode well for building Syria as a state governed by the rule of law and as a homeland for all its sons and daughters.
He added that this was the first time al-Sharaa had acted “as a militia leader rather than as a head of state since assuming the transitional presidency in Syria.”
“I had hoped he would not fall into this mistake,” al-Bunni continued. “General amnesty is an invention of dictatorial and monarchical regimes as a favor granted by the king or leader. There is no such thing as general amnesty in any civilized system.”
Rome Statute: War crimes cannot be politically settled
Syrian lawyer and legal expert Salim Zeno said that crimes classified under international law as war crimes or crimes against humanity are subject to a well-established principle in international jurisprudence, namely that such crimes cannot be subject to amnesty leading to complete impunity.
This approach has been reinforced by multiple judicial precedents. Article 29 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court affirms that such crimes are not subject to statutes of limitation, reflecting their particular gravity and their non-negotiable nature in political settlements.
“In a society that has endured grave violations, any ambiguity in legal texts opens the door to interpretation, and any absence of explicit reassurance opens the door to doubt,” Zeno said. “Public concerns intensify here. People are not seeking revenge, but a guarantee that the new phase will not be built on deals made behind closed doors.”
Transitional justice is not blanket amnesty
Comparative experiences in Latin America, South Africa, and Eastern Europe have shown that unregulated amnesty can create fragile stability that quickly erodes when victims feel their suffering has been reduced to the category of “political settlements.”
Zeno said successful transitional justice rests on three pillars:
Acknowledgment of the truth Accountability for grave crimes Reconciliation for lesser offensesHe stressed that amnesty can serve as a tool for reconciliation in less serious individual crimes, but it cannot replace accountability for crimes that affected the lives and dignity of thousands of Syrians.
What does the Syrian public need today?
According to Zeno, what is required is not emotional rhetoric or general promises, but unambiguous legal clarity:
Explicit identification of excluded crimes Clear confirmation that grave crimes are not covered A defined judicial path for handling major violations“Trust is not granted automatically, it is built through transparency,” he said. “The recent amnesty decree raises a central question: Are we facing a step toward consolidating stability, or a real test of commitment to justice?”
He noted that amnesty in itself is not exceptional in transitional periods, as many countries have used it to move beyond conflict legacies, ease tensions, and address judicial backlogs. However, Syria is not experiencing a typical post-conflict phase, but rather one following widespread violations and crimes that have left deep scars in national memory.
Therefore, public caution was not surprising. “The fear is not of amnesty itself, but of it becoming a legal cover that leads, intentionally or not, to impunity in cases that touch the core of justice,” Zeno said.
Dissecting the decree between text and reality
Formally, the decree grants amnesty for crimes committed before a specified date, with stated exceptions. It combines the dismissal of public prosecution in some cases with sentence reduction or cancellation in others.
The issue, however, lies not only in wording, but in whether grave crimes related to the conflict period are excluded in a manner that leaves no room for ambiguity.
Zeno emphasized that justice is a collective responsibility. An amnesty decree is not merely a text published in the official gazette, but a political and moral message to society. The new phase will not be measured by its ability to close the files of the past, but by its capacity to address them without denial or bargaining.
“Justice is not achieved through silence, nor protected by good intentions,” he said. “It is protected by clarity, accountability, and societal oversight.” He added that legal elites, independent media, and civil society organizations bear responsibility for carefully examining the text, monitoring its implementation, and raising legitimate questions without hesitation.
Justice Minister responds: The measure is lawful
Regarding the controversy over the decree’s constitutionality, Syrian Justice Minister Mazhar al-Wais said that general amnesty is issued through legislative decrees in accordance with the Syrian Penal Code. He stated that the decree was consistent with constitutional norms, particularly given the absence of a sitting People’s Assembly and the urgent need to address existing conditions.
In remarks carried by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA), al-Wais described the measure as lawful and beyond reproach. Differences of opinion, he said, reflect a healthy climate under prevailing freedoms.
1,500 prisoners released, half a million beneficiaries
Justice Minister Mazhar al-Wais justified the presidential amnesty decree by citing severe overcrowding in prisons and the accumulation of cases dating back to the era of the former regime. He said the decree aims to address these backlogs through a clear legal and constitutional framework, with humanitarian dimensions that open the door to hope and reintegration for beneficiaries.
The decree entered into force immediately upon issuance. Judicial staff and specialized committees mobilized and began work at once. More than 1,500 individuals have been released so far, with the number expected to rise as some cases remain in early investigative stages and will be subject to amnesty upon completion of legal procedures, al-Wais said.
He added that more than half a million Syrians are expected to benefit from the removal of the effects of unjust rulings issued by the former regime, including arbitrary sentences in political cases such as “undermining the prestige of the state,” terrorism charges, dealing in currencies other than the Syrian pound, and other accusations leveled against opponents.
Al-Wais noted that more than eight million arbitrary measures were taken by the previous regime against citizens over the past years, a large portion of which have already been lifted, with the remainder under review.
First presidential amnesty of its kind
In February, President Ahmed al-Sharaa issued Decree No. 39 of 2026, granting a general amnesty for crimes committed before the date of its issuance.
The decree reduces life imprisonment and life detention sentences to 20 years in prison. It excludes cases involving personal claims, unless the aggrieved party waives their rights.
In cases where no personal claim has been filed, the decree requires submission within three months. If this period lapses without a claim being filed, the stipulated sentence reductions apply.
The amnesty also covers individuals suffering from terminal illnesses, elderly prisoners aged 70 and above, and juvenile detainees under 18.
Did President al-Sharaa violate the Constitutional Declaration by issuing a “general amnesty”? Enab Baladi.
Hence then, the article about did president al sharaa violate the constitutional declaration by issuing a general amnesty was published today ( ) and is available on ُEnabbaladi ( Syria ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Did President al-Sharaa violate the Constitutional Declaration by issuing a “general amnesty”? )
Also on site :