11 Individuals at least Killed in the First Week of the Ceasefire Agreement including Two Children and a Fetus

SNHR has published its fifth report monitoring the breaches of Ankara Ceasefire Agreement in Syria. The report documents the breaches that were recorded in one week since the Agreement went into effect. The report says that 11 individuals, including one woman, two children, and one fetus, have been killed since 30 December 2016; most of them were killed by the Syrian regime forces.
The report draws upon the monitoring and documentation processes in addition to speaking to survivors, victims’ families, or with eyewitnesses to some of the incidents.

The report sheds light on every breach committed by the parties that are bound by the truce agreement (Government forces, Russian forces, and armed opposition factions) in areas under the control of armed opposition factions and areas under a joint control (armed opposition factions and Fateh Al Sham Front). The report doesn’t include any combat operations in ISIS-held areas.

The report says that on Monday 2 January 2017, armed opposition factions that agreed to the ceasefire agreement released a statement in which they announced that they will suspend any talks regarding the ceasefire agreement in response to the breaches that were committed by the Syrian regime forces and its ally the Iranian regime.

The report monitors 178 breaches including 169 breaches through combat operations in addition to nine through arrest operations. 160 breaches, out of the 178, were committed by Syrian regime forces. Most of the breaches took place in Hama governorate where 55 breaches were documented, followed by Homs with 30 breaches, Aleppo and Daraa with 19 breaches, and then Idlib with 14 breaches. Additionally, the report records 14 breaches by Russian forces including six in Aleppo, whereas three breaches were committed in Hama and five breaches were committed in Idlib by Russian forces to a total of 14.

Furthermore, the report says that four breaches by armed opposition factions were documented in Aleppo and Hama governorates.
The report stresses that most of the breaches documented up until now were committed by the Syrian regime and its ally on the ground the Iranian regime, which the report considers to be the most affected by any political agreement that aim towards a comprehensive settlement. Furthermore, the report calls on the Russian regime, being a primary sponsor of the agreement, to apply pressure on the Syrian-Iranian regime in order to compel it seriously commit to the agreement’s provisions. Otherwise, the ceasefire will ultimately fail.

Also, the report emphasizes that Russian forces have to adhere to the agreement, and cease bombing civilians because any other breaches by the Russian forces, who should supposedly oversee the implementation of the agreement, will demolish the credibility of any future Russian sponsorship.
Lastly, the report calls on the Turkish government, seeing that it is the other party sponsoring the Agreement, to follow-up with the breaches committed by armed opposition factions, and insure that they won’t reoccur in order to preserve the success of the truce.

This article was originally posted on Syrian Network for Human Rights’ website and the full report can be read here.

On Wednesday 21 December, 105 member states of the United Nations General Assembly took an important step forward in seeking justice for the people of Syria. The action-taking was a resolution that paves the way for an independent organization to begin collecting, cataloging and analyzing data and other criminal information coming out of Syria into proper evidence to be used someday by a local, regional or international prosecutor someday to hold accountable all parties committing international crimes in Syria from March 2011 to the present.

Since the beginning of the civil war in 2011 there have been dozens of efforts by various nongovernmental organizations to collect data on the crimes being committed in Syria. Though laudable in their efforts, this massive amount of data is useless in a court of law. It is unreliable and not authenticated with no chains of custody or other safeguards. Essentially almost all of the data being collected regarding crimes in Syria is tainted and inadmissible.

Three organizations did begin to emerge that were working in tangent to correct this problem. The Syrian Accountability Center which I founded in March of 2011 to create a trial package for a future local, regional or international prosecutor. It is designed along the same methods I used to investigate and indict President Charles Taylor for war crimes and crimes against humanity in West Africa. Additionally, two other organizations are doing important work, the Coalition for International Justice and Accountability and the Syrian Justice and Accountability Center. The heads of these three organizations met and briefed various UN ambassadors on the evidence challenges in November. It was there I urged the creation of the accountability center concept.

As we began to consider various mechanisms to cure this problem, an accountability center became apparent, a center run by experienced international criminal law professionals who could take this mass of data already collected, and still coming out of Syria, and turning it into that evidence necessary to hold accountable those parties committing crimes in violation of Syrian and international law.

The international community has spent millions of dollars supporting efforts to build data bases by organizations who in large measure do not have the experience to build a criminal case. The accountability center concept was designed to fix this problem. Throughout the Fall of 2016, we carefully planned a campaign to garner the support necessary to succeed in creating the accountability center. Under the leadership of Ambassadors Christian Weneweser of Lichtenstein [PDF] and Alya Althani of Qatar [PDF] various paths were considered from the Security Council, the General Assembly, and possibly a regional organization such as the European Union or the Arab League. The General Assembly was the most realistic pathway to success.

Past attempts to consider accountability solutions have failed in the Security Council due to the intransigence of Russia. Even the issuance of the Caesar Report, which I co-authored, in 2014 that confirmed horrific crimes against the Syrian people by Assad and his henchmen did not move Russia nor China to support a French resolution [PDF] calling for accountability. This stalemate in the Security Council has frozen any action until now.

Our intent in proposing the accountability center concept in September was to create an efficient capability that over the next several years the international community can rest assured that all of the terabytes of data collected will be converted to proper evidence that can be used in a court of law. Additionally, the United Nations had to be seen to be doing something on behalf of the international community. Perhaps this is that “something.” It certainly is an important step forward.

David M. Crane was the founding Chief Prosecutor of the international war crimes tribunal in West Africa, called the Special Court for Sierra Leone (now residual). He is also founder of the Syrian Accountability Project, and the I Am Syria Campaign. Crane currently is a professor at the Syracuse University College of Law.

David M. Crane, A Step Forward: the UN & Justice for Syria, JURIST – Professional Commentary, January 4, 2017, http://jurist.org/dateline/2017/04/david-crane-a-step-forward.php.

Syrian views on international agreements regarding Syria: Cessation of hostilities, Geneva III, and any upcoming elections under UN supervision FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 17, 2016 Contact: Razan Saffour Email:     rsaffour@tda-sy.org Phone:    +90 (552) 216 35 82  تجدون أدناه البيان في اللغة العربية Turkey – Istanbul: The Day After (TDA) conducted a survey between 1 March 2016 and 19 April 2016, with the aim of identifying Syrians’ views on international agreements regarding a political solution in Syria. Our team of field researchers carried out face-to-face interviews with a sample group of 3183 Syrian citizens inside Syria, consisting of 2113 men and 1070 women. The nature of war and situation in Syria makes it difficult to gain a representative sample, that said our team of researchers managed to obtain answers from diverse samples which allowed us to contrast and compare over the differing demographic and social make-up of the Syrian landscape. Aims of survey: This survey aims to identify and better understand the views of Syrians regarding the international agreements taking place about Syria; the direct and indirect impact of these international agreements; and most importantly airing the views of the main stakeholders, the Syrian people, who are otherwise absent from the negotiations and decision-making table. Key outcomes: Plurality of respondents do not have high hopes regarding the international agreements that have taken places regarding the Syrian situation and for the most part are not convinced that the representatives of states on the negotiation table will bring Syria any closer to a democracy. Only 8.5% of the participants expressed conviction in the agreements, whilst the larger contingent of participants said they see the situation remaining unaffected by the agreements, and if anything, will lead the country to the worst yet, or to how Syria was before the revolution, or believed that Syria will become a split country across sectarian and geopolitical lines. The larger percentage of participants, 40.5%, believe ceasefires serve the regime more than opposition factions, whilst 37.1% believe they changed little in the existing balance of power in the country. A small percentage believe the ceasefires served opposition factions. There is a general consensus among participants over the nature of the agreements regarding ceasefires between the regime and the opposition. Only 14.7% of participants, most of which lived in regime-held areas, classified the nature of agreements as settlement or reconciliation. Across all areas, the Syrian regime was viewed as primarily responsible for the catastrophic situation in the country, closely followed by Russia and the United States. The number of voters who participate in the upcoming elections which will take place a year and half from the Geneva three talks as proposed in UNSC resolution 2254 increase with age.  The youth who participated in the survey of 25 years or under were largely against the elections at 41.3%, in contrast with the 10.2% of those against the elections at the of 56 and above. Read the full report here. آراء وتوجهات سورية في الاتفاقات الدولية حول سوريا: وقف إطلاق النار ومفاوضات جنيف (3) والانتخابات الرئاسية المقبلة برعاية الأمم المتحدة تركيا – اسطنبول: أجرت اليوم التالي” خلال الفترة الممتدة بين 1 آذار/مارس و19 نيسان/ أبريل 2016 مسحاً اجتماعياً، بهدف التعرف على أبرز الآراء والتوجهات حول الاتفاقات الدولية للحل السياسي في سوريا، وقام فريق الباحثين الميدانيين بإجراء مقابلات وجهاً لوجه مع مواطنين سوريين داخل سوريا، شملت (3183) شخص: 2113 رجل و1070 امرأة. إن ظروف الحرب والنزوح التي تعيشها البلد تجعل من غير الممكن الحصول على عينات تمثيلية، لكن فريق البحث تمكن من الحصول على عينات ذات تركيبة متنوعة، وكافية تسمح بإجراء مقارنات بين مختلف المتغيرات الديمغرافية والاجتماعية، قادرة على التزويد ببيانات مهمة عن أبرز الآراء والتوجهات حول الاتفاقات الدولية تمت دراستها (وقف إطلاق النار، مفاوضات جنيف 3، الانتخابات المنصوص عنها في قرار مجلس الأمن ٢٢٥٤). بالإضافة إلى ذلك، تم الأخذ بعين الاعتبار ظروف وشروط الحياة المتفاوتة جداً والتي يعيشها السوريون في ظل الحرب الدائرة منذ سنوات، فتم التمييز بين مناطق محاصرة، وأخرى تحت هدنة، وأخرى تحت سيطرة قوى المعارضة أو النظام، وتم التمييز أيضاً بين أولئك الذين اختبروا معاهدات واتفاقات مشابهة سابقة لوقف إطلاق النار (المدنيين أو المقاتلين وعائلاتهم الخارجين من مناطق هدن) وغيرهم من السكان الذين لم يسبق لهم أن عاشوا تجربة مماثلة. أهداف البحث: يهدف هذا البحث إلى التعرّف على أبرز الآراء في سوريا بخصوص الاتفاقات والتفاهمات الدولية حول سوريا، الأمر الذي يساعد على فهم بعض تبعاتها وآثارها المباشرة وغير المباشرة، بالإضافة إلى ذلك، ستساهم هذه الدراسة في إيصال صوت السوريين المغيبين عن طاولة صناع القرار، وصانعي السياسات الدولية. أهم النتائج: لا يبدو أن المستجيبين يعقدون أمالاً كبيرة على ادعاءات القوى الدولية والأمم المتحدة بأن مفاوضات جنيف ستكون بوابة انتقال سوريا إلى الديمقراطية. فقط 8.5 % قالوا إن سوريا ما بعد جنيف ستدخل في مرحلة انتقال ديمقراطي، بينما اختار حوالي نصف المستجيبين إجابات متشائمة تجاه مستقبل سوريا بعد جنيف، حيث قالوا إن الأمور ستذهب نحو الأسوأ، أو سيعود الحال لما كان عليه قبل الثورة، أو سيبقى الوضع على حاله، أو أن سوريا ستصبح بلداً مقسماً. النسبة الأكبر من المستجيبين تعتقد أن وقف إطلاق النار سيكون في صالح النظام (40.5 %) أو أنه لن يغير من التوازن العسكري القائم (37.1 %)، نسبة قليلة قالت إنه سيكون في صالح المعارضة. هناك شبه إجماع بين المستجيبين على وصف الاتفاقات التي جرت وتجري بين النظام والمعارضة بالهدنة أو وقف إطلاق نار، فقط 14.7 % تصفها بتسوية أو مصالحة، ويبدو أن هاتين التسميتين الأخيرتين تنتشران بشكل رئيسي في مناطق سيطرة النظام. يأتي النظام وحلفاءه الإقليميين في المرتبة الأولى في كافة المناطق كمسؤول عن هذا المآل الكارثي لسوريا ويأتي بعده كل من روسيا والولايات المتحدة الأمريكية. تزداد نسبة المشاركة في الانتخابات  المزمع عقدها بعد عام ونصف من انطلاق جنيف (3) بحسب قرار مجلس الأمن 2254 مع التقدم في العمر، فالشباب في العينة (أقل من 25 عام) هم الأكثر رفضاً لهذه الانتخابات 41.3% مقابل 10.2 % عند الذين تجاوزا ال 56 عاماً. أقرأ الدراسة كاملة هنا The Day After (TDA) is a Syrian civil society organisation working towards democratic transition in Syria, and focuses on work in the following sectors: rule of law, transitional justice, security sector reform, constitutional design, electoral system design, and post-conflict social and economic reconstruction. Visit our website