In recent days, various reactions and comments have surfaced on European and French social media regarding the French judiciary’s issuance of an arrest warrant for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. These reactions included demands that the judiciary has no right to issue such warrants.
The French judiciary issued an international arrest warrant against President Bashar al-Assad, accusing him of complicity in crimes against humanity due to chemical attacks in the summer of 2013 in Syria.
Four arrest warrants were issued for complicity in crimes against humanity and war crimes related to sarin gas attacks on August 21, 2013, targeting Eastern Ghouta and Moadamiyet al-Sham near Damascus, resulting in the death of more than a thousand people.
#WATCH
Mixed reactions in Europe & France over the arrest warrant issued against Syria’s Assad.. Here is what they had to say. pic.twitter.com/HwalIX2SOo— The World Monitor (@tworldmonitor) July 13, 2024
The arrest warrants targeted President Assad, his brother Maher, the de facto commander of the Syrian army’s Fourth Division, and two brigadier generals: Ghassan Abbas, head of Branch 450 of the Syrian Scientific Studies and Research Center, and Bassam Hassan, a strategic affairs advisor to the President and liaison officer between the presidential palace and the research center.
Petitions were filed challenging the decision, arguing that there is no clear and documented evidence indicating who committed the chemical attack in the suburbs of Damascus in 2013.
The most notable development was a group of public prosecutors submitting a request to the French judiciary urging it to verify the credibility and legality of the arrest warrant.
Amidst the controversy over whether France or any other country has the right to issue such decisions, our correspondents in France and Austria conducted interviews with citizens and tourists to gauge public opinion.
One interviewee suggested that global powers orchestrated the chemical attack in Syria in collusion with the Syrian regime. “It’s not just the Syrian president who is guilty, but many nations around the world are guilty of allowing this chemical attack to happen,” they stated. They also expressed scepticism about the investigation’s outcome, believing it might never conclude definitively.
Another person expressed confusion over the complexity of the situation in the region, saying, “I have trouble understanding where we stand between ISIS, Turkey, and Iraq. It’s too complex, and I’m sorry I don’t have a precise opinion on this.”
A third interviewee questioned the legitimacy of the decision, asking, “Do they have the right to issue it and do they have the right to enforce it?”
In contrast, one interviewee defended Assad, saying, “Bashar al-Assad will not go to court because he is a good man; he is not a criminal, in my opinion.”
Another participant argued that France does not have the right to issue decisions to prosecute or condemn in this matter, as it should be an international process, not a national one.
These diverse opinions reflect the contentious nature of the arrest warrant and the broader international debate surrounding the Syrian conflict and accountability for war crimes.
