The French Judiciary’s Decision Against the Syrian President: A Comprehensive Analysis

A move by France increased noise, unrest, accusations, and instability in the Middle East and Europe region. yet this act by France is invalid that’s why it brings a wave of instability to the region.  The case relates to a 2013 chemical attack on opposition-held Damascus suburbs that killed more than 1,000 people and injured thousands.

French prosecutors have requested the country’s highest court to rule on the validity of an international arrest warrant for Syrian President Bashar Assad for alleged complicity in war crimes during Syria’s civil war.

In the starting week of July, judges at the Court of Appeal upheld the arrest warrant issued by France for Assad in November, rejecting the argument that Assad has absolute immunity as a serving head of state.

Along with Assad, France’s judiciary issued arrest warrants for his brother Maher Assad, and two Syrian generals, Ghassan Abbas and Bassam al-Hassan, for alleged complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity.

However, the Syrian lawyer appealed that the ruling was unjustified.

Keep Reading

• Biden Faces Mixed Support from Democrats for 2024 Run, A 7th Democrat Calls for Biden to Drop Out
• How Long do Laptops Last? Things to know about the gadget…
• Trump vs. Biden: Major Points from the First Debate
• UAE’s Leadership in AI Adoption: BCG Study Highlights

Syrian Public Opinion

Not only the lawyers but the public opinions are criticizing France’s judiciary action. They are questioning, “Where is the legitimacy and fairness?”

Reaction Coming from different regions of the world

The rage of dissatisfaction is coming not only from the people of Syria but also from different corners of the world. Many political scientists, activists, and media sources are alleging that the decision of the French judiciary lacks credibility. Based on unreliable sources, it may be influenced by extremist groups known to oppose the Assad regime.

There is a voice coming out that shows that the decision is completely partisan, if a country is advocating war crimes then why don’t they talk about Gaza? Why is this country supplying machinery and war weapons to Ukraine? Why don’t you question Putin?

The verdict on Syrian Al-Assad is fully a biased application of international law.

Is Macron trying to hold on?

Another big issue regarding Macron’s political career and presidency is trending on social media! We all know that Macon is facing bad times in French politics. Elections are coming and chances of winning are very low. Therefore, the decision regarding Syria may be a political stunt to attract appreciation and attention among the French people. Critics argue that France’s involvement in Syria is not aimed at maintaining security but at managing conflicts beyond its borders.