Syria abolishes al-Assad-era ‘terrorism’ court as Kurdish tensions flare

Syria’s newly seated parliament has formally voted to abolish the Counter-Terrorism Court established in 2012 and to nullify the legal effects of its past rulings. State-run Al-Ekhbariya reported that the measure codified a status the authorities had already treated as defunct following earlier executive action. The move is among the first substantive legislative acts by the assembly that convened after the end of the al-Assad family's 53-year rule last December.

The Counter-Terrorism Court had been used during the Assad era to try thousands of people on offences classified as terrorism-related. International rights bodies previously criticised the court’s founding law for failing to guarantee fair trial protections; the UN Human Rights Committee in 2024 highlighted risks of arbitrary detention, torture or ill-treatment, and questioned the court’s independence. In June 2025 President Ahmed al-Sharaa issued a decree dismissing 67 judges who had served on the court, and the March 2025 constitutional declaration called for undoing unjust rulings and restoring confiscated property.

Abolishing the court comes as al-Sharaa’s government seeks to reassert central authority across Syria, but it faces mounting discontent in the northeast. Demonstrators in the Kurdish region blocked the M4 highway near Tal Tamr over steep fuel-price increases after the central government ended subsidies that had applied under SDF control. Hundreds of fuel tanker trucks were stranded and the energy minister was slated for questioning in parliament over the hikes.

Tensions in Kurdish areas also center on a deal to integrate the Syrian Democratic Forces into the national army and on language and education policies. The government has made Kurdish an official language of instruction but limited classroom hours in Kurdish, prompting student protests in Qamishli and Hasakah. While some Kurdish leaders see integration as a path to constitutional rights and participation in state institutions, others worry the arrangement—pushed amid pressure from external actors—will erode gains secured during years of de facto autonomy.