Doktora Amy Austin Holmes

I am quite disheartened, even angry and frustrated, by the verdict passed on Bashar and Maher Assad in absentia today. It is not because of my opposition to the death penalty, which in some cases may be the only way for a society to move forward. In the case of Assad, whose crimes are so monstrous, so enormous, and so extensive that they physically destroyed the lives of well over two thirds of the Syrian population, a single death sentence - even if we don’t know whether the criminal will ever be extradited – is not enough. But that is not my issue with the hurried announcement, thrown in haphazardly with other expected verdicts for lower ranked officials of the Assad regime’s killing machine. The way the alleged trial of Assad was conducted and the quick announcement of the verdict does not befit the people of Syria and their collective suffering. This was a chance to show them and the world, in minute detail, with dates and numbers, with weapon types and abuse manners, with locations and actions, with names and the human stories behind them, why these monsters must pay for the massive crimes against humanity and the war crimes they committed – even if we just go back to 2011. It was the occasion to document and chronicle a part of Syria’s history, creating a cutting point, a place where we turn the page to rebuild society and country, a cathartic moment. But there was no due process to see. Witnesses were not heard. The victims were not recognized. The specific crimes in all their horrific variety were not enumerated. A judgement resting on “premeditated and intentional murder of more than one person and of children” and “torture, arbitrary arrest and crimes against humanity” (as per the verdict) is not acceptable when the Syrian revolution was so savagely crushed and the collective Syrian loss was so pervasive. This is not justice, transitional or otherwise, and this sentence might as well have been given a day after Assad fled Syria. This lack of procedure and this verdict on the fly – as if it were a side ruling after the actual trial and sentencing of Atef Najib - seem to be an attempt to swiftly turn the page and move on from the thorny business of holding Assad-era officials and associates accountable. On this, the new government has delivered little information or justification as to why only some crimes merit consequences, or why some criminals are arrested while others roam free; it owes every Syrian an explanation. For the biggest perpetrators of the biggest man-made catastrophe this century, special tribunals – such as those in The Hague - are necessary. I doubt Syrian society will get closure from displays of pretend justice, which will not pave the way for a rule of law that absorbs the lessons of the past. Assad deserves a million and more punishments, and I will cheer the day he finally pays. It is, however, more important for the Syrian nation to receive the formal recognition of the crimes it endured through due process, to witness the structured tribunals that would allow moving on as other nations have before, and to begin to have faith in its judiciary and in its future. 54 years of Assadism cannot just be filed away and archived like this - even knowing the many other crimes that remain unpunished since its demise. No peace without justice, no justice without accountability.