SJAC’s Trial Monitors Reflect on the Alaa M. Verdict

On June 16, 2025, in a groundbreaking verdict, Syrian doctor Alaa M. was convicted of crimes against humanity for torturing his patients. This landmark decision marks the first criminal trial worldwide to address the complicity of medical professionals in state torture in Syria. The trial represents a crucial step toward holding perpetrators from all sides of the conflict accountable.

Since the trial began on January 19, 2022, the Syria Justice and Accountability Centre (SJAC) has meticulously monitored the proceedings through local, trained court monitors. SJAC has published regular trial reports in both English and Arabic, providing vital documentation. As with previous domestic trials involving Syrian government officials, the absence of official court translations has obscured the historical record, limited available testimony, and hindered future reflection on human rights violations and justice processes. SJAC's comprehensive monitoring efforts have therefore been essential to establishing a historical record of the trial and ensuring documentation is available for victims and their families.

After the verdict, SJAC's trial monitors, who were present throughout the proceedings, offered several observations regarding the trial's significance and its shortcomings.

Significance of the Trial

The Trial of Anwar Raslan and Eyad Al Gharib confirmed broad suspicions that security and military forces were the primary perpetrators of torture in Syria. But it is more difficult to conceive that one who is trained to heal is actually responsible for torture. This is precisely what makes the trial of Alaa M. in Frankfurt, Germany, so shocking: an individual who took the Hippocratic Oath was found to have tortured his patients.

Document analysis revealed that medical staff were integral to the chain of events: detainees were transferred to the hospital by intelligence personnel, then examined by a doctor who subsequently wrote a report on their health condition. Without the doctor and their report, this chain would have been broken, regardless of whether the doctor acted under duress. Hospitals also served as critical links between detention centers and mass graves. Uncovering what transpired within these facilities will help to clarify the chronological sequence of events and determine the fate of the missing

In previous trials, such as the one in Koblenz, testimonies indicated that detainees were sent to hospitals and that bodies were transferred from hospitals to mass graves. This trial sheds light on that previously missing link, thereby confirming the sequence of events.

Challenges in the Trial

Several challenges emerged during the trial which may inform future trials:

• Forged documents may have been submitted to the court. Authentication of such documents will be key in future trials.
• Witness information was shared by a defense lawyer with external parties. This creates witness protection issues and could discourage future witnesses from stepping forward if such misconduct is not addressed.
• At least one of the plaintiffs and one of the witnesses were threatened.
• There were periodic issues with interpretation. The public did not have access to Arabic interpretation. One Arabic interpreter was dismissed for lack of impartiality. Asylum hearing transcripts were also shared in the trial which were replete with translation issues.
• The trial was exceedingly long, taking over three years to complete. This is notable given that it was arguably less complex than the trial of Anwar Raslan in Koblenz, Germany, which involved a much broader factual pattern, a wider range of accusations, and a larger number of victims.

Observations Concerning the Accused

Witnesses, including Alaa M.'s colleagues, described him as demonstrating arrogance, boastfulness, and public support for the regime, which the Accused first denied, but numerous private Facebook chats confirmed his loyalty to the Assad regime.

Alaa M. thus failed to come across as a credible witness for himself. While he acknowledged mistreatment in the hospital, he denied contributing to it. The Accused also incriminated himself by admitting to lying to the court on two occasions: about not being a supporter of the regime and about not having seen corpses at the hospital. He also acknowledged lying about a key figure [name redacted] exaggerating claims that he was armed, which was untrue. These claims occurred during communications with the Syrian embassy in Berlin. Alaa M.'s testimony also inadvertently supported the prosecution’s allegation that he was, in fact, present at Homs and Tishreen hospitals during the charged events.

Key Findings of the Court

The court made several key findings:

• The key figure who did not testify at trial and was frequently impugned by the defense, was found not to be an extremist nor that he had a comprehensible reason to falsely accuse Alaa M. This significantly undermined the defense's case.
• The court determined that the conduct of the Accused, Alaa M., was particularly grave, leading to a lengthy sentence.
• The court established that Alaa M. poses a danger to the general public and ordered preventive detention due to his sadistic tendencies.

Conclusion

The conviction of Alaa M. represents an important moment in the pursuit of justice for victims of torture in Syria. By specifically targeting the role of a medical professional, this trial broadens the scope of accountability beyond traditional security and military actors, highlighting the critical importance of all individuals, adhering to ethical standards and human rights principles, especially during conflict. While the trial faced challenges, including issues with document authenticity, witness protection, and translation, its successful conclusion contributes to a larger foundation of fact finding to Syrian transitional justice efforts.

The security forces, intelligence services, army, and shabiha are widely known to have committed torture in Syria. However, this trial revealed another category of perpetrators: medical personnel, including doctors and nurses. This trial revealed that there are many perpetrators of different kinds, all contributing to a common, malevolent purpose.

This, and other UJ trials, contribute to revealing what took place in detention centers and facilities, restoring some of the rights of detainees and survivors, and holding to account those responsible. Transitional justice must include criminal processes in Syria, but should also include trying criminals who fled to Europe and elsewhere. Syrians do not want criminals prowling and roaming free in their homeland or abroad, nor does Europe want its soil to be a safe haven for such criminals.

 ___________________________

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