Syrian Internal Security forces deployed in Al-Haffeh, rural Latakia. The death of Muhammad Ghamira following his detention in Al-Haffeh has intensified public scrutiny of detention practices and renewed demands for accountability over alleged abuse in custody. Photo Credits: SANAI borrow the title of this article from the novel Alive Enough by the Syrian writer and journalist Ali Homaedy In it, I found a profound expression that encapsulates the reality of Syrians today; their pain, suffering and equally important, their hopes and dreams. While the novel is a valuable contribution to Syrian prison literature, its critical undertones point directly to the severe torture inflicted upon detainees within the Assad regime’s dungeons and its notorious black sites. It speaks to the cruel agony endured by the victims, their families, and society as a whole. Ironically, torture as a phenomenon and a practice does not merely affect a specific individual; its ripples extend to both the nuclear and extended family. It morphs into a tool wielded by the regime to govern society and the state. Consequently, the line blurs between the direct torture victims face inside detention centers and the reality of the broader society (outside the prison walls) which is governed by the dread of persecution and the compulsions of raw power.
From this standpoint, people sought to protect themselves from any harm under the thumb of an absolute, crushing power, striving to sustain existence by any means possible, remaining “alive enough.” This was the reality under the Assadist regime of fear and terror.
Today, however, the equation itself has completely changed: fear no longer rules the people. The revolution has reshaped their disposition, shattered the barriers of fear, and unleashed freedom of expression, the audacity of speech, objection, protest, and dissent from their shackles. Yet, despite this transformation, the plight of Syrians remains a relentless struggle just to stay alive at the bare minimum.
The Syrian Memory
The torture incident suffered by Muhammad Ghamira could have easily passed unnoticed, much like the cases documented over the past twenty months. However, the vigilance of the Syrian public, driven by the fear of torture becoming entrenched and perpetrators escaping accountability, forced the authorities to form a committee to investigate the matter. The incident became a catalyst for an absolute rejection of what transpired, sparking demands for an end to impunity and for the prohibition of torture through strict legislation, rather than mere moral condemnation.
Attempts to downplay the gravity of current violations by rejecting any comparison with the Assad regime have been met with resistance among Syrians who refuse to see past abuses used as a justification for present ones. Such comparisons understandably provoke strong reactions, particularly among the current authorities and their supporters, who invoke the “legitimacy of liberation.” Yet the comparison is not necessarily about equating the scale of abuses. Rather, it arises from concern that some of the same tools and methods of coercion once associated with the Assad regime are being reproduced by the new authorities. It was incumbent upon the new Syrian authority to rise above and entirely renounce any tools of coercion and intimidation against Syrian society, be it individuals or diverse social factions.
The funeral procession of Muhammad Ghamira in Latakia, following his death after detention at Al-Haffeh Police Department.
The Syrian memory is deeply scarred with wounds that never heal; any violation of rights and freedoms serves as a painful revival of a memory saturated with trauma. There is hardly a Syrian family that has not had at least one member subjected to interrogation, fear, terror, torture, arrest, enforced disappearance, or death. All these experiences are directly tied to the torture that the Assad regime practiced as a “systematic, organized, and sustained security policy.” The images circulating today of detentions, torture, methods of summons, interrogations, and releases mirror the same bleak and grotesque images that Syrians refuse to experience again after the fall of Assadism. In a vivid and deeply painful parallel, the “release stamp” published by the Syrian writer Khawla Barghouth took me back to the stamp impressed by the authorities of Adra Prison onto the back of my hand in the summer of 2012.
“The Syrian memory is deeply scarred with wounds that never heal; any violation of rights and freedoms serves as a painful revival of a memory saturated with trauma.”
Abdulrahman Matar
I still retain its photograph which continues to vividly resurrect memories of my torture; raw, cruel, and searing.
As for the “slap” which the investigative committee dismissed as a mere “transgression,” it was undoubtedly the prologue to every episode of torture under the former regime. In my case, a single not so easily dismissed slap in the State Security Administration left me with a permanent hearing impairment in my left ear!
A Transgression or a Crime?
It is not difficult to see the glaring discrepancy between the report issued by the investigative committee on Ghamira’s case and the statement made by the Minister of Interior, Anas Khattab. The committee went to great lengths to avoid classifying the incident as an “act of torture”, which would mean acknowledging it as a “crime”, and chose instead to label it an “impact of a transgression.” Those working in the legal and human rights fields understand entirely the vast difference between these two classifications, and how this dynamic reflects on subsequent lawsuits, investigations, and trials.
It appeared as though the committee, which is not an independent body, attempted to circumvent the reality of what occurred. Its formation was merely a reaction to public pressure and an attempt to appease public demands. Ultimately, the committee chose to reflect its core nature: an extension of an authority incriminated by practicing torture inside interrogation and detention centers and enabling impunity for those who perpetrate it. Because of this, similar committees fail the test of public trust and cannot truly fulfill their obligation to pursue justice.
In effect, the committee managed to absolve the security authorities of direct institutional responsibility for the violations occurring within their facilities, dismissing them as “isolated individual practices.” In doing so, it ignored a mountain of prior cases that clearly point to the use of “torture, coercion, forced confessions, and arbitrary detention” as an entrenched methodology. This methodology hardens with zero regard for existing laws that prohibit and criminalize such acts, flourishing under the authority’s deliberate blindness and silence.
Hence, the Minister of Interior’s statement “rejecting injustice and impunity” came as an attempt to bridge the rift carved by the committee’s report, which had deeply disappointed the public despite their initial acceptance of the investigation. A crime must be characterized exactly as it is, without downplaying the severity and nature of the violation, and without fabricating unacceptable pretexts. Therefore, it is paramount that Syrian security authorities and legal institutions undertake a rigorous review of their policies. This must include a comprehensive evaluation of their personnel and their strict commitment to statutory regulations and fundamental principles of rights and human freedoms. No “religious fatwa, grievance board, or tribal council” can ever serve as a substitute for institutional law and an independent judiciary under any circumstance.
“A crime must be characterized exactly as it is, without downplaying the severity and nature of the violation, and without fabricating unacceptable pretexts.”
Abdulrahman Matar
Guarantees and Reviews
What Syrians truly need, therefore, is a radical overhaul of the security policies linked to citizens’ daily lives, executed in a manner that guarantees their freedom and dignity. This demands a revolutionary shift in conduct that completely breaks away from the legacy of the Assad regime, as well as the security doctrines of all factions, security, and military forces that prevailed prior to December 2024.
The continuation of these violations acts as a critical factor in the evaluations and assessments conducted by international institutions regarding the Syrian situation.
This is especially true now that the new Syrian authority has opened up to the international community, its independent bodies, and organizations affiliated with the United Nations and the European Union, alongside Syrian human rights organizations. Consequently, the Syrian authorities must conduct continuous internal reviews of the performance of its affiliated institutions, particularly within the security sector. They must monitor the conduct of individuals and commanders responsible for law enforcement, refuse to tolerate any infractions against rights and liberties, and commit to activating the core constitutional guarantees that safeguard the rights of individuals and society alike.
Torture is a phenomenon that is, unfortunately, deeply intertwined with the abuse of authority. It stands as one of the most heinous and dangerous crimes, yielding catastrophic, cascading effects if governing authorities fail to prevent it through binding legal mandates and rigorous accountability. Implementing such absolute accountability is a vital and correct step on the path toward building a state that truly protects its citizens and preserves their rights and human dignity.
