{"id":132689,"date":"2024-06-03T11:34:41","date_gmt":"2024-06-03T09:34:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/?p=132689"},"modified":"2025-03-20T16:35:18","modified_gmt":"2025-03-20T15:35:18","slug":"syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html","title":{"rendered":"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In the four-day Syrian trial in Paris, judges on May 30 gave their reasoning for the verdict handed down on May 24. In a symbolic recognition for victims, three high-ranking Syrian security officials - Ali Mamlouk, Jamil Hassan and Abdel Salam Mahmoud - were found guilty in absentia for the torture and death of a French-Syrian father and son.<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

During the civil parties\u2019 and public prosecutor\u2019s closing arguments on May 24, and when hearing reactions to the guilty verdict that the Paris Assize Court handed down a few hours later, two questions hovered beneath the high ceilings of the historic Palais de Justice. The first concerns the lack of adversarial debate in a trial where the defence was absent and investigators were unable to visit the scene. The second is the impact of such a conviction on the Syrians present at the trial, and what they have to say about it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On that day, Ali Mamlouk, Jamil Hassan and Abdel Salam Mahmoud, three heads of military intelligence for Bashar al-Assad\u2019<\/a>s regime, were found guilty of the arrest and death of French-Syrian father and son Mazen and Patrick Dabbagh and expropriation of their property. The three were sentenced to life imprisonment. These acts were qualified as complicity in crimes against humanity and war crimes. The sentence was handed down after four days of hearings<\/a> and the testimony of 11 witnesses, none of whom were eyewitnesses to the events that befell the victims. Issuance of the reasoning for the verdict was postponed \u201cdue to the complexity of the case\u201d, according to court president Laurent Raviot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A barrier against \u201cnormalization\u201d with Syria?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

At the end of the hearing Obeida Dabbagh, brother and uncle of the two disappeared who brought this case to justice and fought for the truth for over ten years, spoke in short, emotional sentences before the cameras of French and Arab television channels. \u201cIt was the first Assize Court of my life,\u201d he said. \u201cIt was nerve-wracking, but everything turned out for the best in the end. I\u2019d like to thank the judges for their decision. I didn\u2019t expect anything more. For me, it is absolute happiness. For Mazen and Patrick, I tried to do my utmost. For them, posthumously, it\u2019s also a victory.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Standing back from the cameras, Syrian lawyer Mazen Darwish, who was at the trial and whose Syrian Centre for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM) participates in numerous trials in Europe, also expressed his satisfaction, despite some \u201ccomplicated emotions\u201d. \u201cI feel sorry that this did not take place in Syria. I feel sorry that this is mostly symbolic,\u201d he told Justice Info. He went on to explain why, despite everything, this trial in absentia \u201cmeans a lot to the Syrian community\u201d, some of whose members had come from Germany and elsewhere in Europe to attend. \u201cIt\u2019s a message for the victims, for the authorities, that Syria needs justice, not revenge. But it\u2019s also a message for the refugees. I\u2019m one of them. I came back from death, but I also want to go back to my country,\u201d he said. This verdict is important, Darwish explains, for all Syrian refugees worried about being sent home if Paris or Berlin \u201cnormalizes\u201d relations with the Assad regime. For them, he says, it represents a barrier against the temptation of diplomats to \u201cgive killers a second chance\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThis is a fantastic first step in France towards judicial recognition that Bashar al-Assad\u2019s regime is a criminal one. It\u2019s a signal to our leaders,\u201d agrees Cl\u00e9mence Bectarte, lead lawyer for the civil parties, who has been supporting Obeida Dabbagh and his wife Hanane since 2016. \u201cYes, it is a symbolic trial, because tomorrow the convicts won\u2019t be sleeping in prison. But we know very well that international justice takes time. All the efforts made can be used for other cases,\" she says. \u201cSince the creation of the P\u00f4le [a judicial unit specialized in punishing crimes against humanity], this is the first time we\u2019ve tried a case where we couldn\u2019t go and investigate in the field. Twenty-three people testified in these proceedings, some of them afraid. I\u2019m not denying the difficulties, but if there were only three survivors at the trial, it\u2019s because we had to make choices. We only had four days.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fear among the witnesses<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI\u2019m not used to pleading in front of an empty stand,\u201d lamented C\u00e9line Viguier, the public prosecutor, as she began her closing address. The public prosecutor\u2019s office, she explained, had done everything in its power to ensure that the defendants were informed of the trial opening and the possibility of presenting a defence. This was done through informal channels -- notably the Arabic-language media and Syria\u2019s Permanent Mission to the United Nations in Geneva --, due to the breakdown in diplomatic relations between Paris and Damascus. One of the accused had, according to several testimonies, occupied the Dabbagh family home in Damascus, so a summons was sent to that address \u201cby registered letter\u201d, she said. How, then, could the powerful Syrian intelligence services, of which the defendants are members, have been unaware of this trial? In fact, they chose to ignore it, not to appoint lawyers, and \u201cthis is a hearing that in no way infringes their rights\u201d, she concluded.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe acts committed are part of a context that tens of thousands of Syrians can recognize,\u201d said the prosecutor. She nevertheless referred previously to the investigating judges\u2019 difficulties in questioning the three direct witnesses to the arrest of Patrick and Mazen Dabbagh on November 3 and 4, 2013, at their Damascus home. Mazen\u2019s wife and daughter, Haifa and Raya, who subsequently took refuge in France, declined the investigating judges\u2019 summons on three occasions. Only one telephone exchange took place with the daughter. They \u201cfeared for their safety\u201d, it says in the indictment. Wissam Naser, Mazen\u2019s brother-in-law who was arrested with him, was the one who told the story of how they were taken to Mezzeh prison and found Patrick, who had been arrested the day before. But his account was reported by Obeida; the examining magistrates were unable to question the brother-in-law, who is said to have remained in the country and still works for a powerful businessman close to the regime. Another witness could not be heard by the examining magistrates. This was a young man, also incarcerated in Mezzeh, who told the SCM that he had seen Patrick Dabbagh in this detention centre \u201ctowards the end of 2013\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe fear of reprisals doesn\u2019t stop with exile,\u201d explains Darwish, who reported this testimony to the magistrates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Material evidence<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The indirect testimonies have, however, been supplemented by documents. Obeida obtained them thanks to proceedings he initiated with a lawyer in Syria to contest the expropriation of the family home - effective as of July 2016. He first received two death certificates, issued in August 2018 by the Syrian Interior Ministry, which do not specify the place or cause of death. Only dates of death are indicated. Then a judgment was transmitted to him, pronounced against his brother in January 2014 by a court of exception, which ordered the transfer of his assets to the Syrian state. And finally, still thanks to this procedure, a rental contract for the house drawn up for the benefit of the air force intelligence service, for around 30 euros a year. This document corroborates the testimony of the family home\u2019s neighbours, who had informed Obeida that the house was occupied by a certain Abdel Salam Mahmoud, director of the investigation branch of the air force intelligence service, which controls the Mezzeh prison.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In its 16-page reasoning released on May 30, the Paris Assize Court recalls that Patrick \u201cwas 20 years old at the time of his arrest, that he was in perfect physical health, and that he died less than three months after his arrest\u201d, according to the official date of his death. \u201cUnder these conditions, this short period of time and the elements of context allow us to conclude that he was the victim of violence and torture that caused his death.\u201d As for his father Mazen, who officially died after four years\u2019 in prison, \u201cthe cause of his death is necessarily related to his detention, even if the court has no precise elements as to the nature and severity of the ill-treatment or torture suffered\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A concerted plan<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The court found that these acts were committed \u201cin execution of a concerted plan\u201d, which was \u201cdecided at the highest level of the State and implemented at all levels of the administrative and military chain, (...) by meticulously listing the deceased victims (numbering and taking photographs), organizing the disappearance of bodies in mass graves, and systematizing the use of torture leading to mass murder\u201d. The number of civilian victims of this policy \u2013 \u201cmore than 100,000 disappeared according to several concurring estimates\u201d - and the use of photographs from the so-called Caesar files<\/a> by a UN-commissioned investigative team make it possible, say the judges, \u201cto illustrate the widespread and systematic nature of this attack\u201d, constituting a crime against humanity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the war crime, the court referred to the conclusions of the International Commission of Inquiry on Syria, which \u201callow us to consider that the clashes between the regime and various opposition forces (from March 2011) gradually turned into a generalized and continuous confrontation\u201d in early 2012. Consequently, the State\u2019s appropriation of the Dabbagh house \u201ccan be legally analysed as extortion, insofar as the procedure (...) had the sole aim of confiscating and appropriating the property of a person who cannot be considered a belligerent\u201d and so constituting a war crime (\u201cd\u00e9lit de guerre\u201d) under French law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bashar el-Assad\u2019s immunity<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In a formulation unlikely to be endorsed by all, the court starts by saying that Bashar al-Assad --at the top of the chain of responsibility \u2013 \u201cenjoys the immunity recognized by the international community for any Head of State\u201d, but that \u201cthis is not the case for the three accused\u201d. \u201cThe Court considers that crimes against humanity, deemed the most serious in the hierarchy of crimes, cannot be covered\u201d by the immunity \u201calso granted by international law to any public official for acts performed within the scope of his functions\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judges confirmed \u201cin the first place the criminal responsibility of Ali Mamlouk\u201d, who was then head of the National Security Office, \u201cthe supreme hierarchical authority of all Syrian intelligence services\u201d. Secondly, the judges held \u201cJamil Hassan\u201d, at the time head of the Air Force intelligence service, criminally liable. \u201cHe was the recipient of daily reports from his services and was described as being particularly present at the Mezzeh airport site\u201d. And finally, they pronounced the criminal liability of Abdel Salam Mahmoud, who \u201ctook possession of [Mazen Dabbagh\u2019s] home in July 2016, after his service had evicted the rightful occupants\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lastly, the court ruled that the three convicts should receive identical sentences, \u201ceven if their involvement was at different levels in the chain of command\u201d. The arrest warrants issued against them on March 29, 2023 remain in force. As indicated by the court president at the start of hearings, the \u201cdefault\u201d procedure means that if the three Syrians are arrested they will be retried.<\/p>\n\n\n

\r\n\t\t\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\t
Recommended reading<\/div>\r\n\t\t\t
\"Syrian<\/div><\/a>\r\n\t\t\t\r\n\t\t\tIn France, a first Syrian trial \u201cby default\u201d\r\n\t\t<\/a>\r\n\t\t\r\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the four-day Syrian trial in Paris, judges on May 30 gave their reasoning for the verdict handed down on May 24. In a symbolic recognition for victims, three high-ranking Syrian security officials - Ali Mamlouk, Jamil Hassan and Abdel Salam Mahmoud - were found guilty in absentia for the torture and death of a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":72,"featured_media":132683,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[566],"tags":[4168,2653,2640],"ji_location":[2231,2499],"class_list":["post-132689","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-national-tribunals","tag-bashar-al-assad","tag-crime-against-humanity","tag-torture-en","ji_location-france","ji_location-syria"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nSyrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In the Syrian trial held in France, 3 senior members of the Syrian security services were found guilty, in absentia, of crimes against humanity (torture). A symbolic recognition for the victims.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In the Syrian trial held in France, 3 senior members of the Syrian security services were found guilty, in absentia, of crimes against humanity (torture). A symbolic recognition for the victims.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"JusticeInfo.net\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2024-06-03T09:34:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-20T15:35:18+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1200\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"fpetit\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@FranckF_P\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@justiceinfonet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"fpetit\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"fpetit\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/594d5223f847f747608174d9c27d1abc\"},\"headline\":\"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-03T09:34:41+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-20T15:35:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\"},\"wordCount\":1878,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Bashar al-Assad\",\"crime against humanity\",\"torture\"],\"articleSection\":[\"National tribunals\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\",\"name\":\"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-03T09:34:41+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-20T15:35:18+00:00\",\"description\":\"In the Syrian trial held in France, 3 senior members of the Syrian security services were found guilty, in absentia, of crimes against humanity (torture). A symbolic recognition for the victims.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":800,\"caption\":\"\u201cI didn\u2019t expect more\u201d. Obeida Dabbagh, the brother and uncle of two Syrians who disappeared in 2013 in the jails of Bashar al-Assad\u2019s regime, speaks out after the Paris Assize Court\u2019s verdict on Friday 24 May against three high-ranking military officials absent from the dock. \u00a9 Aurore Lesenge \/ AFPTV\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/\",\"name\":\"JusticeInfo.net\",\"description\":\"For justice to be done, it must be seen\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Justice Info\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png\",\"width\":1199,\"height\":1200,\"caption\":\"Justice Info\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"fpetit\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/x.com\/FranckF_P\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/auteur\/fpetit\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment","description":"In the Syrian trial held in France, 3 senior members of the Syrian security services were found guilty, in absentia, of crimes against humanity (torture). A symbolic recognition for the victims.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment","og_description":"In the Syrian trial held in France, 3 senior members of the Syrian security services were found guilty, in absentia, of crimes against humanity (torture). A symbolic recognition for the victims.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html","og_site_name":"JusticeInfo.net","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","article_published_time":"2024-06-03T09:34:41+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-03-20T15:35:18+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1200,"height":800,"url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"fpetit","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@FranckF_P","twitter_site":"@justiceinfonet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"fpetit","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html"},"author":{"name":"fpetit","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/594d5223f847f747608174d9c27d1abc"},"headline":"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment","datePublished":"2024-06-03T09:34:41+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-20T15:35:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html"},"wordCount":1878,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg","keywords":["Bashar al-Assad","crime against humanity","torture"],"articleSection":["National tribunals"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html","name":"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg","datePublished":"2024-06-03T09:34:41+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-20T15:35:18+00:00","description":"In the Syrian trial held in France, 3 senior members of the Syrian security services were found guilty, in absentia, of crimes against humanity (torture). A symbolic recognition for the victims.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/Syrie-France_ObeidaDabbagh-verdict-smartphone_@Aurore-Lesenge-AFPTV.jpg","width":1200,"height":800,"caption":"\u201cI didn\u2019t expect more\u201d. Obeida Dabbagh, the brother and uncle of two Syrians who disappeared in 2013 in the jails of Bashar al-Assad\u2019s regime, speaks out after the Paris Assize Court\u2019s verdict on Friday 24 May against three high-ranking military officials absent from the dock. \u00a9 Aurore Lesenge \/ AFPTV"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/132689-syrian-trial-learn-first-default-judgment.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Syrian trial: what to learn from this first default judgment"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/","name":"JusticeInfo.net","description":"For justice to be done, it must be seen","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#organization","name":"Justice Info","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/justiceinfo_logo-trans_1200x1200px.png","width":1199,"height":1200,"caption":"Justice Info"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JusticeInfo\/","https:\/\/x.com\/justiceinfonet","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/justice-info","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/channel\/UCyCEsARodyuWtkWyhn-e7pA"]},{"@type":"Person","name":"fpetit","sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/FranckF_P"],"url":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/auteur\/fpetit"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132689","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/72"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=132689"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132689\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":143022,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132689\/revisions\/143022"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/132683"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132689"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132689"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132689"},{"taxonomy":"ji_location","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.justiceinfo.net\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ji_location?post=132689"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}