French Court May Set Global Precedent in Assad Immunity Case

Until now, so-called ‘personal immunity’ prevents any head of a state from being prosecuted by courts of a foreign country. However, this long-standing protection is now being tested in France. In 2021, a woman filed a complaint before the French courts over chemical attacks carried out in Eastern Ghouta in 2013. The investigation quickly traced the chain of command back to the Syrian President and in November 2023, a French investigative judge issued an arrest warrant against Bashar al-Assad.

The French Court of Cassation — the country’s highest judicial body — must now decide whether to uphold the arrest warrant. At the heart of the case is whether an exception to personal immunity of the Syrian President can be made considering the gravity of the alleged crimes. On July 4, 2025, the Court of Cassation heard arguments from the plaintiffs’ legal counsel and the General Prosecutor’s Office. The target of the case, al-Assad, did not send a representative.

The plaintiffs’ counsel contended that an exception was justified due to the extreme severity of the chemical attacks allegedly ordered by Assad against civilians in Douma. The traditional argument has been that making such an exception would destabilize international relations and open the door for other national judges to prosecute foreign leaders – including potentially France’s own president. In response, the plaintiffs’ counsel argued that the horrors inflicted upon the Syrian population, and the regional instability caused by the civil war, far outweighed concerns about possible diplomatic turmoil after Assad’s arrest by a French court. Moreover, the counsel emphasized that France would not be acting in isolation. France’s highest court could count on the support of the international community which extensively documented the chemical attacks and repeatedly called for accountability.

For the Attorney General, the risks of such an exception to immunity of heads of state remained too high. He urged the Court to preserve the principle of state sovereignty and the inviolability of ‘personal immunity’ — even in cases involving the most egregious crimes. Still, permitting leaders such as Bashar Al-Assad to indefinitely escape justice remains deeply troubling. How could the arrest warrant then be maintained? The Attorney General proposed an alternative argument: if it is not possible to question a head of state’s immunity, it is still possible to challenge Bashar Al-Assad’s status as head of state. Given the crimes committed against his own people and the territorial losses incurred by the Syrian regime, France ceased to recognize Bashar Al-Assad as Syria’s head of state after 2012. As a consequence of this ‘dis-recognition’, the Attorney General argued that Assad no longer enjoyed ‘personal immunity’ after that date, meaning the arrest warrant issued in 2023 is valid. It was a novel argument.

Despite the gravity of crimes at stake, the prevailing view in international law is that national courts lack jurisdiction to prosecute sitting foreign heads of state. Hence, the Court will likely find no exception to ‘personal immunity’ even against Bashar Al-Assad and even for crimes as serious as using chemical weapons against Syrian civilians. The International Criminal Court itself limited its prerogatives over Syria and never intended to overstep its lack of jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the French Court of Cassation now faces a critical legal question: Does France’s ‘dis-recognition’ of Assad as Syria’s president affect his immunity? A ruling in the affirmative could set a powerful precedent — affirming that leaders accused of international crimes against their own people should not be shielded.

On the same date, the Court is set to rule on another form of immunity — known as ‘functional immunity’ — which protects state agents from prosecution for acts performed as part of their official duties. This ‘functional immunity’ was invoked by Adib M., former head of the Syrian central bank, who is currently being prosecuted by the French judiciary for having used the national financial institution to cooperate with a company involved in the manufacture of chemical weapons. Many national courts — including French ones — have already rejected functional immunity in cases of international crimes, while Germany and Spain have even amended their criminal codes to allow for the prosecution of foreign state agents suspected of such atrocities. There is small risk for the French Court to adopt the same approach and confirm the legality of the proceedings against Adib M.

The Court will deliver its decision(s) on July 25, 2025.

An additional arrest warrant was issued by a French investigative judge against Bashar Al-Assad on January 12, 2025, in another case related to the death of a French Syrian national targeted in a 2017 bombing in Dara’a. Following his removal from the presidency, Bashar Al-Assad was no longer protected by immunity at the time this second arrest warrant was issued, so that it was not contested and remains active.

___________________________

For more information or to provide feedback, please contact SJAC at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to SJAC’s newsletter for updates on our work