By Shella Abdulhalim
QAMISHLI, Syria (North Press) – The repatriation of Islamic State (ISIS) militants and their families from Northeast Syria has raised questions regarding their fate and the international community’s response. The challenges surrounding the convictions, trials, and reintegration of these individuals into society have become pressing issues, since repatriation and trial efforts remain stalled and face obstacles.
Although five years have passed since the military defeat of the group in Syria, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria (AANES) still faces challenges in moving forward with this issue.
More than 10,000 ISIS militants surrendered to the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) after capturing the town of Baghuz in the eastern countryside of Deir ez-Zor, eastern Syria, in 2019, with the support of the U.S.-led Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS.
The prisons and camps in AANES areas house more than 60,000 ISIS militants and family members from 58 Arabic and foreign countries.
Some countries like France, Russia, and Sweden repatriated a few of their citizens through coordination with the AANES, but the lack of international support for trials in Northeast Syria has further complicated the situation.
Trials and convictions
From time to time, Western media outlets publish reports about trials involving individuals linked to ISIS. The latest case was on March 14 when France charged the former wife of an ISIS leader with crimes against humanity for mistreating and enslaving a Yazidi girl in Syria.
According to Fabrice Balanche, an expert on Middle Eastern affairs from France, all repatriated adult ISIS members are tried, sentenced, and imprisoned for a minimum of five years.
A new law allows for prison sentences to be imposed on anyone who joined ISIS or another terrorist group, even if they claim they were in Syria for “humanitarian work,” he said.
Balanche points out that women may avoid conviction if they can prove they were forcibly taken to Syria by their husbands, while children are placed with foster families or specialized institutions for the purpose of de-radicalization.
Meanwhile, Manish Rai, a geopolitical analyst, says many of these individuals are facing trials in their home countries due to laws that prohibit participation in armed conflicts abroad or association with proscribed organizations.
He added that repatriated individuals are debriefed and investigated for their role in the conflict. However, due to the challenge of collecting evidence from the conflict zone, progress in these trials and convictions has been limited.
Moreover, Rai stressed that Western countries, under international pressure, have reluctantly repatriated their ISIS-linked nationals.
Reintegration
Rai emphasized that returnees are considered significant security threats upon their return and are closely monitored by the security agencies of their home countries.
To integrate these individuals into the new society, Rai said that many governments have initiated rehabilitation and reintegration programs aimed at assisting these citizens in starting a normal life. The success of these programs, however, remains to be seen.
For his part, Balanche highlights that there are few studies on the reintegration of former ISIS returnees into civilian life, since the majority are still in prison and those released are under police surveillance.
He said that there are concerns that some individuals may conceal their true beliefs and engage in terrorism again.
Balanche also suggested that psychological monitoring and de-radicalization processes, including those for children, are not effective, and some individuals retain nostalgia for their terrorist commitment.
Lack of international support for AANES’ trials
In June 2023, the AANES announced it will hold trials for foreign ISIS militants in line with international and local terrorism laws.
The AANES explained this decision was made because the international community failed to answer its repeated calls to repatriate ISIS members, and to ensure justice for the victims.
However, the international community did not provide support or assistance for the trials.
Balanche explains that the AANES is not recognized as an autonomous state or region by the U.N., and therefore, it is the Syrian judicial authorities who have jurisdiction if these trials were to take place.
In turn, Rai indicates that the international community’s objections to these trials are based on concerns about the AANES’ capacity, resources, legitimacy, and adherence to international standards.
The geopolitical analyst argues that “If the international community lent a helping hand to AANES then international legitimacy could have been established in Northeast Syria.”
No adequate procedures
The decision to repatriate ISIS members who have committed human rights violations without proper procedures has sparked controversy, Balanche argues the justice systems in some countries, such as France, may lack sufficient evidence to impose heavier sentences.
Balanche cites the example of Islam Alloush, a former spokesperson of Jaysh al-Islam armed group, who is accused of assassinating human rights activists in Douma. Due to the lack of evidence, Alloush was only charged with belonging to a terrorist organization and possible complicity in assassination.
Balanche asserts that such leniency raises concerns about justice being served adequately.
While Rai emphasizes that ideally the prosecuting authorities of the place where the crimes were committed should have the right to prosecute and put the accused on trial.
He suggests that coordination between home countries and local authorities is necessary for prosecuting and putting the accused on trial. However, resource limitations and the challenge of gathering evidence from the conflict zone hinder the effectiveness of these efforts.
International community’s approach
When asked about the international community’s thoughts on trying ISIS members, Balanche emphasizes that the notion of a unified “international community” is flawed.
Balanche noted that Russia employs stricter justice measures, often sentencing ISIS terrorists to death or life imprisonment. In contrast, Western democracies such as France and the U.S. follow legal procedures where sentences tend to be less severe. Western countries prefer keeping their ISIS-affiliated nationals imprisoned in Syria due to legal concerns.
According to Manish Rai, the absence of an international tribunal dedicated to investigating crimes committed by foreign ISIS members leaves individual countries responsible for investigating and prosecuting their own citizens who joined the terrorist group.
However, he highlights that the investigative agencies of these states have limited resources in gathering evidence from the conflict zone. Insufficient evidence leads to a lack of or minimal convictions, undermining efforts to deliver justice.
Rai concludes that the international community lacks a concrete plan for ensuring justice for the crimes committed by ISIS members.