Soumariya Intimidation… Eviction by Force, Not by Law

Residents of the Soumariya neighborhood in Damascus are facing eviction through force and direct intimidation that has been carried out over the past 72 hours. The goal is to compel them to leave their homes and properties unlawfully, in clear violation of human rights and the laws in Syria.

On Wednesday, August 27, 2025, an armed force entered Soumariya neighborhood on the outskirts of the capital Damascus, which is predominantly inhabited by members of the Alawite sect. A man claiming to be the head of the executive force tasked with evacuating the neighborhood told the residents they had 72 hours to leave. He also handed them a paper signed by the Housing Committee, whose letterhead indicated it was affiliated with the General Secretariat of the Presidency of the Republic. The paper lacked a date and the personal name of the signatory, in addition to lacking legal authority, as this committee has no legal right to issue an eviction order.

In an attempt to understand the role and basis of this committee, we reviewed the Official Gazette to look for the decree that established it, its date, tasks, and legal mandate. However, we found no trace of it, which makes it a non-transparent committee with unclear legal reference.

Soumariya neighborhood is located on the outskirts of Damascus near Muadamiyah, and it is one of the informal neighborhoods in Damascus and its suburbs.

There are two types of adjacent housing in the neighborhood: the first are military residences whose occupants received eviction orders months ago. They all handed them over and left without objections or problems. Currently, the Ministries of Interior and Defense are renovating them.

The second part consists of civilian homes built in stages, some of them over 50 years old. It is estimated that between 15,000 and 20,000 people live in these homes.

Referring to document No. 3904 issued by Damascus Governorate in February 2025 and signed by Governor Maher Marwan, the governorate is legally responsible for the property, and no administrative measure can be taken without referring back to it.

Regarding claims that the property belongs to individuals and that the houses were built illegally on private property, records show that the land was expropriated by the state decades ago and that compensation was paid to the original owners and their partners. Thus, the property is now public and under the authority of Damascus Governorate, which affirms that it is the only legal authority responsible for these properties.

Damascus Governorate recognizes the houses built on the property and their residents, and acknowledges their rights. Therefore, these houses, even if considered informal, fall under the protection of laws, regulations, and constitutional property rights, which include both land ownership and ownership of the buildings and furniture. They cannot be violated.

Accordingly, the Housing Committee’s decision becomes legally questionable: does the committee even have the right to issue a decision on a matter related to Damascus Governorate? This question will be addressed later in this report concerning the legality of the decision itself.

The immediate eviction notice delivered on Wednesday was accompanied by direct intimidation of the residents to force them to leave as quickly as possible. The process began with the arrest of the neighborhood’s mukhtar and members of the local committee by armed elements of the unidentified executive force, accompanied by members of public security.

The neighborhood committee is officially recognized by Damascus Governorate, as is the mukhtar appointed by the governorate. They officially represent local administration. Yet despite their official status, they were arrested and verbally abused before later being released after intervention from several parties, including Damascus Governorate.

The process also violated individual rights and property by forcibly breaking into homes. We documented testimonies from residents whose homes were stormed without judicial authorization. According to testimonies, some furniture was destroyed, force was displayed, and sectarian slurs and insults were used against the residents. We also obtained video footage of one attacked home showing part of the vandalism and destruction inside.

In addition, the armed force, claiming to be mandated by the General Secretariat of the Presidency, marked some walls with “X” signs and wrote religious slogans. This behavior is reminiscent of practices used before armed factions were absorbed into the Ministries of Defense and Interior after the regime’s fall, when faction fighters used to mark houses in captured villages or towns to signify seizure and wrote religious phrases on walls.

After the incident, residents turned to Damascus Governorate, where some met Sheikh “Abu al-Khair,” who is in charge of the file there. According to governorate officials, they had no connection to the eviction order and were as surprised by it as the residents.

Residents also contacted the National Reconciliation Committee, specifically Sheikh “Hassan Soufan,” who informed them that he was trying to resolve the issue and stop the evictions.

Nevertheless, the intimidation, violence, and threats forced dozens of families to leave their homes out of fear for their lives. One of those who left told us that he no longer felt safe in his home and chose to save his life rather than stay.

Soumariya is one of dozens of informal neighborhoods in Damascus, and among hundreds across Syria.

Residents believe the attempt to evict them is an act of sectarian and regional discrimination, as no national plan has been announced to address the informal housing crisis, nor any clear mechanism to deal with it. Instead, their neighborhood was selectively and illegally targeted, while other well-known informal areas in Damascus and across Syria were left untouched—something that is understood as sectarian targeting.

Reviewing official responses to informal housing in other areas, we found a circular issued on August 28 concerning illegal buildings in Aleppo. It allows residents to repair and renovate their informal houses. This circular was issued by the General Directorate of Local Administration in Aleppo.

This circular provides clear facilities to residents of informal housing, reflecting the state’s responsibility to its citizens and their right to housing, even if informal. In contrast, in Soumariya the state has abandoned its responsibility by evicting residents, stripping them of their homes and property.

The eviction order was issued by the Housing Committee, which is an unidentified body to begin with. Regardless of its nature, it is not the competent authority. The second party, aside from the residents, is Damascus Governorate, meaning the dispute is between the governorate and the residents.

In such cases, the judiciary is the only competent authority to rule, not any other body regardless of its title. The matter has been raised before, with a dispute-resolution committee intervening and judicial rulings being issued on the case since 2006, as we noted earlier. This means that any eviction order issued by an executive body is legally invalid.

According to Syrian Civil Procedure Law, no eviction order may be enforced except by a judicial ruling.

Furthermore, this case clearly involves two types of ownership: land ownership and ownership of the buildings and furniture, both of which are protected under law.

According to Civil Law as well, this is a case of long-standing possession without interruption, going back decades. Thus, it is not a recently built violation, which further confirms that only a judicial decision could authorize any action.

This means that any decision issued by the Housing Committee is null and void for lacking any legal basis.

The eviction was accompanied by a series of violations and breaches of Syrian law. First and foremost, aside from the illegitimacy of the decision itself, it did not grant residents sufficient time to appeal. They were only given 72 hours, which is a clear violation of basic human rights.

How are these families supposed to secure alternative housing, move their belongings, etc.? What kind of state throws its citizens onto the streets without offering alternatives or solutions?

The raids that accompanied the process also violated the sanctity of homes, which is protected under Syrian law.

Furthermore, decisions in such cases should be issued individually for each resident and through the judiciary. No collective order may be issued, as each case has its own specific circumstances and legal considerations.

Thus, based on several factors, the eviction is entirely illegal and impermissible, violating the Constitutional Declaration, the Civil Procedure Law, and Civil Law.

It is also a violation of human rights and of the state’s responsibility toward its citizens, their right to protection, and their right to litigation and defense of their interests.

The Constitutional Declaration of Syria clearly stipulates in Article 12, Paragraph 2 the state’s commitment to international conventions and human rights charters, which also protect the sanctity of housing and the right to shelter. According to the Geneva Convention, what happened could amount to forced displacement.

• Annul the Housing Committee’s decision for lack of legal jurisdiction, and reaffirm that any eviction procedure must be issued exclusively by an individual judicial ruling for each property.
• Reinstate residents who were intimidated and forced to evacuate their homes, which they have occupied for decades, ensuring their safety and continued residence under applicable laws and regulations.
• Require Damascus Governorate, as the legal owner and competent authority, to respect residents’ rights and stop any interference beyond its jurisdiction.
• Open an independent judicial investigation into the violations accompanying the eviction (arrests, raids, property destruction).
• Guarantee residents’ right to adequate housing under the Syrian Constitution and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.
• Suspend any collective eviction decisions in informal neighborhoods until a clear national plan is established to address informal housing, respecting residents’ rights.
• Involve local communities (mukhtars, neighborhood committees, civil society organizations) in any plans related to informal housing instead of imposing top-down decisions.
• Appeal to the international community to pressure the Syrian government to halt forced displacement policies and discriminatory treatment of residential neighborhoods.