هذا التقرير متاح أيضًا بـ العربية
In 2026, 30 August, the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, coincides with a new phase in the Syrian government’s efforts to address one of the former regime’s most complex legacies. The fate of thousands of people remains unknown. Their families are left in legal limbo between continued disappearance and a declaration of death, with no distinct legal status that would allow them to manage the missing person’s affairs and protect their rights until their fate is established.
As part of these efforts, the National Commission for the Missing in Syria was established after the former regime’s fall under Presidential Decree No. 19 of 2025. Its mandate includes searching for missing and forcibly disappeared people, establishing their fate, documenting cases and creating a national database, as well as providing legal and humanitarian support to their families.
In June 2026, the commission launched national consultations on the principles that will underpin a draft law on missing and forcibly disappeared people. Participants included families of the missing, survivors and others directly affected, alongside civil society organisations and legal and human rights experts.
The consultations come amid a gap in current Syrian legislation, which provides no distinct legal status for a missing person that would allow their family to manage their affairs without treating them as deceased.
According to the Independent Institution on Missing Persons in Syria, the available options are limited to establishing that a person is missing, appointing a judicial representative to manage some of their affairs or, when the legal conditions are met, seeking a ruling declaring them dead.
The scale of the issue makes this debate all the more important. According to data from the Syrian Network for Human Rights covering March 2011 to June 2026, at least 181,677 people remain detained, forcibly disappeared, or of unknown fate or whereabouts at the hands of parties to the conflict in Syria. Of these, 177,021 are classified as forcibly disappeared.
As the commission drafts a legal framework for missing persons, the consultations are working towards defining the rights the law will guarantee to the missing and their families, the missing person’s legal status until their fate is established, and the division of powers and responsibilities among the bodies involved.
Legal problems facing the missing and their families
The central problem is the lack of a distinct legal status for people whose absence is forced, whether through enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention or abduction during armed conflict, according to Asi al-Hallaq, legal adviser at the National Commission for the Missing’s Idlib centre. Most Arab legal systems provide no intermediate status recognising “absence for coercive reasons” as a legal condition in its own right. This includes Syrian law, which draws on French civil law and Islamic jurisprudence.
Speaking to NoonPost, Hallaq explained that the law generally recognises only two situations: a person who is alive and present, able to exercise their rights and fulfil their obligations normally; and a deceased person, whose estate is liquidated and opened to inheritance, whose marriage ends, leaving their wife a widow, and whose custody and guardianship rights lapse. A forcibly disappeared person fits neither category: they are not present to exercise their rights, but neither are they definitively dead, legally or in fact. This “legal vacuum” is the heart of the problem, he said.
The effects reach into the everyday lives of the missing person’s family, Hallaq explained. A wife may remain in legal limbo, neither divorced nor widowed, which may prevent her from remarrying. In many legal systems, she may also be unable to obtain spousal maintenance because the law assumes the marriage must continue without providing a mechanism to accommodate prolonged absence.
She may also struggle to dispose of jointly owned assets or assets in her husband’s name, such as bank accounts and property, without a power of attorney from him or a court ruling. Some social insurance benefits or pensions tied to the breadwinner’s death may also remain unavailable while his death has not been established.
Children are affected too. Legal guardianship of minors is disrupted because the father remains legally the “guardian”, even after years of disappearance. There is no quick mechanism for transferring guardianship to the mother or appointing another guardian without lengthy and complex court proceedings concerning his absence. Families are also deprived of social rights linked to the presence of a “breadwinner” or compensation tied to the breadwinner’s death, because death has not been established.
The missing person’s money and assets, including property, bank accounts and businesses, risk becoming impossible to manage. There may be no one legally entitled to manage, dispose of or even maintain them by paying taxes, renewing contracts or collecting rent.
Meanwhile, debts, taxes and contractual obligations continue to fall due, potentially exposing the family to further financial risks when no one is legally authorised to act on the missing person’s behalf.
Inheritance presents another problem. While the missing person’s legal status remains “suspended,” inheritance cannot proceed, whether it concerns their share of someone else’s estate or the distribution of their own estate to others. Other heirs in the extended family, such as the missing person’s siblings or parents, may find estates frozen until their fate is established, sometimes prolonging family and legal disputes for decades.
Family members may also struggle to complete administrative procedures or secure rights that require the missing person’s presence, signature or consent, including renewing certain identity documents or obtaining official certificates. Compensation and reparation schemes are also often structured around whether a victim is alive or dead, without making equivalent provision for missing people whose fate remains unknown.
Without a distinct legal status for absence, families pay the administrative, financial and social price of the crime of enforced disappearance twice, Hallaq said: first through the loss of a loved one, then through years or decades of legal paralysis that disrupts daily life.
A “certificate of absence” offers a more suitable solution
In a document published on its official website, the Independent Institution on Missing Persons in Syria said the lack of a legal document regulating the status of missing people represents a gap in current Syrian legislation. It described a “certificate of absence,” or a similar document such as a “statement of disappearance,” as a more suitable option than declaring the missing person dead.
According to the institution, such a document could allow families to organise the missing person’s legal and administrative status without presuming their death, while avoiding legal complications should they return. It could also establish that the person is missing, allowing families to manage property, exercise rights and address urgent legal needs.
A “certificate of absence” could also spare families the psychological, social and legal consequences of a declaration of death, which many may not be ready to accept while their loved one’s fate remains unknown.
The institution said current Syrian legislation does not yet provide for a “certificate of absence,” and the options available in practice centre on a declaration of death or judicial permission to manage the missing person’s affairs.
It expressed hope that the anticipated law would address this “legislative gap” by establishing a clear framework through which families could obtain a certificate of absence or similar document until the missing person’s fate is known. This would protect their rights and simplify the procedures for establishing the missing person’s legal status.
In a written response to NoonPost’s questions, the UN institution said it continues to engage with relevant parties on the legal and practical challenges facing families of the missing in Syria, including in the context of the legislation being prepared.
Uncertainty about a missing person’s fate and whereabouts can have profound and lasting effects on their family, it added. Alongside the search itself, families may face legal, administrative, economic and social difficulties arising from their loved one’s absence. Meeting their needs and protecting their rights is therefore an essential part of any comprehensive response to the issue.
The institution stressed that efforts to address these problems should remain centred on missing people and their families. Families must be able to exercise their rights and deal with the practical consequences of a loved one’s absence without undermining their right to know the truth about what happened to them.
It said legal or administrative measures intended to address families’ difficulties must not end efforts to search for missing people or establish their fate and whereabouts. The search remains essential, and measures to support families should proceed alongside it, rather than replace it.
The institution also considers families’ active and meaningful participation essential to discussions about their rights and needs. Their experiences and perspectives are important both to understanding the practical consequences of a loved one’s absence and to developing responses that properly reflect those rights and needs.
What does a “certificate of absence” provide?
Hallaq agrees with the independent institution that a “certificate of absence” is a more suitable mechanism for cases of enforced disappearance. It separates two needs, he explained: the family’s practical need to manage the missing person’s financial and legal affairs, and the need to establish their fate — whether they are alive or dead.
A judicial declaration of death conflates these matters, making proof of death a means of resolving administrative or financial problems. A certificate of absence allows those problems to be addressed without presuming death or determining the person’s fate.
Hallaq added that such a document is consistent with the right to know the truth. International humanitarian law and international human rights law, including the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, recognise families’ right to know their loved ones’ fate as a distinct right. It cannot be waived or bypassed through a legal presumption of death for administrative purposes. Forcing a declaration of death without evidence could effectively close the search and undermine this right.
According to Hallaq, a certificate of absence limits consequences that may be difficult to reverse if the missing person is later found alive. In situations of mass enforced disappearance, as in Syria, there is a real possibility that missing people may reappear alive after years, emerging from detention centres, conflict zones or even other countries.
If a person declared dead later returns alive, this creates severe legal complications involving a wife’s second marriage, an estate already liquidated and distributed, or changes to child custody. A certificate of absence avoids this risk because it does not, by its nature, produce final legal consequences.
It also offers greater flexibility over timing. Because it does not determine whether someone is alive or dead, it can be issued relatively quickly, easing the family’s administrative difficulties sooner than a declaration of death, which usually requires years of waiting under traditional laws.
There is also a humanitarian and psychological dimension. According to Hallaq, the certificate respects the “ambiguous loss” experienced by families of the missing. It gives them practical legal tools without forcing them to accept closure when, in their minds, their loved one’s fate may remain unresolved for years.
Legal complications of a “certificate of absence”
Creating a legal mechanism for a certificate of absence brings complications of its own. It must protect the rights of missing people and their families without creating a rigid status that leaves families in limbo indefinitely or replaces efforts to establish the missing person’s fate.
According to Hallaq, the first complication concerns the wife’s rights and the continuation of the marriage. If a marriage remains “suspended” indefinitely, a wife may be denied the right to remarry for decades, which could be considered a violation of her right to form a family.
He pointed to approaches in other legal systems, such as judicial separation on grounds of absence in Maliki jurisprudence or “divorce for disappearance” under some Arab laws. The proposed solution is to allow a wife to seek judicial separation after a specified period without declaring her husband dead.
There should also be a mechanism for paying maintenance to the wife and children from the missing person’s assets through a custodian or representative, without requiring proof of death. Social rights linked to the wife’s status, such as health insurance and social security, should continue, or equivalent rights should be provided during the absence.
For children, temporary guardianship and custody are among the main complications. According to Hallaq, the mechanism should allow guardianship powers over education, travel and medical decisions to pass to the mother or a selected guardian automatically, or with minimal procedural intervention, when a certificate of absence is issued. Separate, complex court proceedings should not be necessary.
Children’s rights to have their parentage legally established must also be protected, including when conception precedes the father’s disappearance but the child is born during his absence. His absence must not prevent either the establishment of parentage or the registration of the birth.
The child’s future right to know the full truth about their father’s fate must also be guaranteed. The certificate of absence must not become a means of permanently closing the search.
For property and financial affairs, the mechanism needs to establish a clear, swift process for appointing a custodian or judicial representative, who could be the wife or one of the missing person’s relatives. The custodian would have defined powers to manage and maintain the assets, but would need judicial permission to dispose of them permanently, for example through a sale. This would protect the missing person’s rights should they return.
Safeguards must also prevent the exploitation of those assets, such as requiring periodic reports from the custodian and placing them under judicial oversight.
Where a missing person owns a business or shares in a company, a mechanism should ensure that business can continue or, where necessary, that major decisions such as sale or dissolution are frozen until the person returns or their fate is established.
A certificate of absence also creates a particular inheritance complication. If someone dies and a missing person is among their heirs, a decision is needed on what happens to the share they would have received. Hallaq considers the most appropriate solution to be holding that share pending a determination of the missing person’s status. Temporarily distributing it among the other heirs and requiring them to return it if the missing person reappears would be more complicated and offer less protection for the missing person’s rights.
A reasonable period for holding the share must be defined, along with a mechanism to manage, preserve or invest it without harming the other heirs’ rights.
This also requires addressing the potential conflict between a certificate of absence and inheritance rules based on confirmed death, either by amending existing legislation or introducing specific provisions for missing people.
Clear procedural rules are needed to establish who can apply for the certificate: the wife, relatives within specified degrees of kinship or the public prosecution. They should also establish whether others may apply on an authorised applicant’s behalf.
The law should identify the issuing authority and whether it is judicial or administrative. The preferred model would allow an administrative or quasi-judicial body to issue the certificate quickly, while retaining the right to appeal to the courts.
Another essential question is how long families must wait before applying. Hallaq believes this period should be relatively short and, in cases of conflict and enforced disappearance, may be measured in months rather than years. These cases should be distinguished from ordinary absence, such as travel or a voluntary loss of contact, which are legally different.
If the missing person returns, revoking the certificate must be immediate and straightforward. Rules must also resolve the financial and legal consequences arising during their absence, including protecting third parties who acted in good faith when dealing with the custodian or representative within their authorised powers.
In all cases, Hallaq stressed, a certificate of absence must not replace the search for the missing person. It should operate alongside it, allowing families to manage their affairs and address the practical problems caused by the absence. Investigations and efforts to establish the person’s fate must continue, and the case must not be closed merely because a certificate has been issued.
The law’s impact on families
A dedicated law on missing people need not be limited to regulating searches and establishing their fate. It can also address many of the legal, economic and social consequences that enforced disappearance has for their families.
Hallaq believes addressing these consequences should be an essential part of any comprehensive law on the missing. Some, particularly the profound psychological and social effects, cannot be addressed through law alone and require a coordinated system of legal measures, institutions and services.
In civil and administrative matters, the law can address guardianship, marriage, inheritance and asset management through measures such as a “certificate of absence” and the appointment of a temporary custodian. These would allow families to manage their affairs without first establishing the missing person’s fate or proving their death.
The law can also address economic and social consequences by giving families the right to temporary compensation or social assistance during the person’s absence, rather than making eligibility depend solely on proof of death.
This could include tax exemptions or simpler administrative procedures relating to the missing person’s property, as well as priority for their families in certain government support programmes covering education, health and housing.
Beyond these material consequences, the law can enshrine families’ right to truth and justice. This includes the right to regular updates on investigations and to participate in searches, excavation, exhumation and identification, including forensic procedures and DNA analysis.
The law can also establish a right to reparation and compensation based on the harm caused by enforced disappearance itself, without requiring proof of death. Hallaq noted that international human rights law recognises family members of the disappeared as victims of the violation, alongside the disappeared person.
A law on the missing can also establish a permanent national body to coordinate between families and official institutions, consolidate databases on missing people and provide continuing administrative and legal follow-up on families’ cases. Its role would extend beyond receiving an application or opening a case.
Such a body could perform functions similar, in some respects, to those of the UN’s Independent Institution on Missing Persons or the Syrian national commission established under Decree No. 19 of 2025.
But the law’s ability to address the consequences of enforced disappearance has limits, Hallaq said. Psychological trauma and the “ambiguous loss” experienced by families require separate psychosocial support programmes, rather than legislation alone. Even so, the law can turn those services from optional initiatives into rights the state is obliged to provide.
The same applies to some social and cultural consequences, including the stigma that may affect families, particularly in cases of politically motivated enforced disappearance, and the social pressures women may face. These require policies to raise awareness and accompanying social measures; law alone cannot address them directly.
Implementation also remains a fundamental challenge, especially in Syria. Even a well-developed law is insufficient without the political will and institutional capacity to uncover security archives, gain access to detention sites and mass graves, and cooperate in forensic work and identification.
In these circumstances, even the best legal framework for a certificate of absence remains a “harm-mitigation measure,” rather than a substitute for uncovering the truth and establishing the fate of the missing.
According to Hallaq, the ideal law would therefore combine three parallel, independent strands. The first would cover the technical and investigative work of searching for missing people and establishing their fate, continuing beyond the issuance of a certificate of absence. The second would address the civil consequences for families, including the certificate, custodianship, guardianship, and holding and managing the missing person’s inheritance share pending a determination of their status. The third would cover rights and reparation, including compensation, social and psychological support, and families’ rights to information and participation.
Keeping these strands separate, rather than making all rights depend on resolving whether a person is alive or dead, can prevent the legal and human suffering of families of the missing from continuing.