The title above is an eloquent and direct statement with which our colleague, the human rights advocate Abdelkader Tamraz, opened his remarks at the "Republic Salon" (*Salon al-Jumhuriya*). It precisely encapsulates the reality of what transpired during the session on "expropriation" (*istimlak*) held at the salon.
Building upon this premise—and his objective account of the political and security climate from which this unjust legislative legacy emerged—I pose the following question:
Are you aware that the period during which major expropriation laws were enacted in Syria was inextricably and immediately linked to the events involving the Muslim Brotherhood and the subsequent security crackdown against them?
Today, many of us hear about ongoing protests and demands in various governorates—most notably in Damascus and its countryside—calling for the repeal of this legacy of expropriation laws (such as Law No. 60 of 1979 and its amendments, and Decree No. 20 of 1983).
However, to fully grasp the dimensions of this issue, one must recognize that these laws were not conceived as routine urban planning measures, nor were they intended for the absolute "public good." Rather, they were born out of a bloody security climate characterized by the crushing of both civil and military opposition during that era. In this context, the legal arsenal was weaponized as a tool for collective punishment and for altering the very identity of cities and towns:
1- Popular and labor-union activism in Damascus (1979–1980): The capital was by no means absent from this broader landscape. Concurrently with the escalating events in the north, the country witnessed a broad popular, labor, and civil movement—led by independent professional syndicates (lawyers, doctors, and engineers)—demanding an end to the state of emergency and the restoration of freedoms. This popular movement was bolstered by a general strike, during which historic Damascus marketplaces, such as the Al-Hamidiyah Souq, were shut down.
2- Crushing the Capital and Mass Arrests: The regime’s response to quell this movement was swift and decisive. In April 1980, it issued a decree dissolving all elected professional syndicates. Simultaneously, its security apparatus launched a harrowing wave of arrests, targeting hundreds of citizens—including lawyers, doctors, intellectuals, and activists in Damascus. This plunged the capital into a state of paralysis and a suffocating security siege, tightening the regime’s grip well before the events in Hama.
3- Expropriation and Military-Security Encirclement:
• Law No. 60 of 1979: Enacted in late 1979 following the intensification of the armed conflict, this law was used by the regime to encircle major urban centers by expropriating vast tracts of land surrounding them (as seen around the city of Aleppo and in the expanding western suburbs of Damascus, such as Dummar, Qudsaya, and Muadamiyat al-Sham). These areas were subsequently converted into military-affiliated housing cooperatives, further tightening the siege on these cities.
• Military Expropriation in the Southern Region (Al-Kiswah and its surroundings): This same approach was applied with even greater severity to the southern region of Damascus, including areas such as Al-Kiswah and Zakiyah. Hundreds of hectares of fertile agricultural land were seized from their original owners—whether through forced occupation, outright expropriation, or under the pretext of "public utility and defense"—to make way for major military barracks and security division headquarters (such as those at Jabal al-Mani’, the bases of the First and Fourth Divisions, and various other military battalions and units). This deprived entire families of their long-standing sources of livelihood.
• Legislative Decree No. 20 of 1983: Issued approximately a year and a half after the military crushing of the city of Hama in the historic 1982 massacre, this decree served to legalize the "status quo." Entire neighborhoods—such as the al-Kilaniyah and al-Asidah districts in Hama—were expropriated, demolished, and razed to the ground. Residents and those displaced were barred from returning to their ancestral lands and properties; this same approach was subsequently applied across other governorates, cities, towns, and villages throughout Syria.
4- The Systematic Destruction of Private Property:
These laws were not merely the product of an obsession with security; they were also an implementation of the state-directed socialist philosophy adopted by the regime at the time to combat individual ownership.
The middle class and the civilian economic elite were stripped of their assets—land and facilities—which were then transferred to the public sector, regime loyalists, and military-affiliated settlement associations.
Under the guise of appealing "socialist" slogans, the very concept of private property was dismantled. The economy was shifted away from free production and development toward a rentier system, placed entirely under the control and priorities of the security apparatus.
Did the owners at the time have any capacity to object? In practical, real-world terms, no one dared to object.
Amid a climate of terror governed by Law No. 49 of 1980—which mandated the death penalty for anyone affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood—charges were always ready and waiting.
Anyone who dared to protest the confiscation of their land for the benefit of the ruling party or the military—or even anyone who showed a shred of human sympathy for the suffering residents of Hama or other cities—was immediately dragged off to an intelligence branch, facing pre-fabricated, malicious accusations such as:
- "Sympathizing with outlawed gangs."
- "Treason and opposition to the goals of the revolution and socialism."
- "Financing terrorist organizations."
Such reports were enough to lead to a person’s forced disappearance or death. Consequently, the vast majority of parents and grandparents during the 1980s and 1990s were compelled to remain silent and accept the loss of their life’s savings, all to safeguard their own lives and the lives of their children.
We all know that in the period following the events in Hama and leading up to the turn of the millennium, simply attending the dawn prayer (*fajr*) at a mosque was, in itself, a criminal offense—one that could land a person on the gallows or, at the very least, result in decades of imprisonment. Today, as we navigate the process of dismantling this legacy—with moves underway in the People’s Assembly to repeal Law 49 of 1980—the public must recognize that the issue of expropriation is not merely a dispute over real estate or investment. Rather, it is a case of collective punishment, demographic engineering, and militarization that has persisted for over 40 years. Projects on these lands cannot be revived without restoring rights to their rightful owners and providing fair redress to those who have been harmed.
In light of the above:
"Do not sanitize the history of that gang, and do not immortalize it by preserving its laws or leaving its consequences unaddressed."
Injustices are inherited, and rights do not expire due to the passage of time—nor by feigning surprise.
— Mohieddin Al-Zaitani
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.