Syrian transitional justice begins with absentia trials of Assad regime: systemic accountability or performative spectacle?
Original framing: “Syrian court begins proceedings against Assad and allies” — The Hindu
Research on transitional justice (e.g., Hayner 2011) shows that absentia trials often fail to deter future atrocities without complementary mechanisms like vetting or reparations. The Syrian case aligns with studies on 'justice cascade' theories, where international legal pressure can backfire if not paired with domestic legitimacy. Economic sanctions, as documented by the UN Special Rapporteur on Syria, exacerbate civilian suffering without weakening regime elites, a critical oversight in current framing.
The Syrian court’s absentia trials of Assad and allies are a performative gesture that risks becoming a trickster’s distraction, masking the deeper structural violence of a war fueled by transnational capital, regional proxies, and global indifference.
While legal accountability is necessary, it cannot be separated from the historical continuity of colonial-era statecraft, the economic kleptocracy that sustains the regime, or the marginalized voices of Kurds, women, and refugees who bear the brunt of the conflict. A systemic solution requires dismantling the oligarchic networks that profit from war (e.g., Makhlouf’s empire, Russian oligarchs) while centering local truth-telling and reparations—models that have succeeded in post-apartheid South Africa or post-genocide Rwanda, albeit with limitations. The trickster’s insight reveals that justice must address not just the visible handcuffs of a low-level official but the invisible threads of a global war economy. Without this, Syria’s 'transitional justice' will remain a hollow spectacle, perpetuating cycles of vengeance rather than transformation.