Damascus, Sept. 9 (SANA) Syrians seeking to reclaim homes and land seized during years of conflict face complex legal disputes over ownership, forged transactions and missing records, as designated courts take on cases arising from property seizures and manipulated ownership.
The Justice Ministry in October 2025 assigned designated civil courts of first instance and civil appeals courts to handle disputes involving the seizure of property or manipulation of ownership during the circumstances of the Syrian revolution.
Existing cases were transferred to the designated courts, with procedural periods to be shortened where possible without compromising the right to legal defense.
The cases range from properties occupied without authorization to homes and land transferred or sold using forged or incomplete documents. Legal experts told SANA that the appropriate legal route depends largely on how possession was lost, whether the current occupant has documents supporting a claim and what evidence the original owner can produce.
Syrian Bar Association President Mohammad Ali al-Tawil said a single property may involve an original owner, heirs, an occupant or a new claimant, with disputes further complicated by unregistered contracts or missing documents.
Legal experts Mohammad Abu Jaafar and Raghid Diab said a crucial distinction is whether a case involves unauthorized occupation or a genuine dispute over ownership.
If a person occupies a property without the owner’s consent and has no document establishing a legal right to it, the case may constitute unlawful seizure. If the occupant holds a contract, deed or official registration, however, the dispute generally becomes a civil matter requiring a court to determine ownership or the validity of the transaction.
Abu Jaafar said an action to evict an unlawful occupant may be appropriate when the owner has clear proof of ownership and the occupant has no legal title. Before filing, he advised owners to obtain an official property record and register notice of the lawsuit on that record to prevent further transactions while the case is being heard.
An action to recover possession may be used when an owner has been dispossessed and seeks to regain possession within the legally prescribed period. An action to prevent interference may apply when an established rights holder faces interference with the use of the property or another party asserts rights over it.
Diab said the correct legal route ultimately depends on how possession was lost, with unauthorized occupation requiring a different approach from cases involving documents whose validity must first be challenged.
Forged transfers complicate claims
The process becomes more complicated when an owner discovers that a property has been registered in another person’s name.
Diab said courts must distinguish between a good-faith purchaser who was unaware of defects in the original transaction and someone who acquired property through fraud or forgery.
Where registration was based on forged or otherwise invalid documents, owners may seek cancellation of the registration and restoration of the property record, alongside criminal proceedings against those responsible for the forgery.
Where the current holder possesses documents believed to be valid, a civil court generally must examine the competing evidence and determine the validity of the ownership claim.
Missing documents do not erase rights
Years of conflict and displacement have left some owners without documents traditionally used to establish property rights, but losing those records does not in itself extinguish ownership, the experts said.
Al-Tawil said ownership may be established or reconstructed through land registry records, official and tax documents, powers of attorney, previous court rulings, inheritance records, expert assessments, inspections and other evidence accepted by courts.
He called for mechanisms to restore lost documentation and reconstruct property files, particularly to protect the rights of displaced and absent owners.
The three experts said addressing Syria’s property disputes requires three main elements: documenting property rights, simplifying evidentiary procedures and developing transitional justice mechanisms suited to the country’s circumstances.
Such mechanisms could complement the designated courts by registering and documenting claims and conducting preliminary examinations, they said, while final decisions on ownership and substantive disputes would remain with the judiciary.
Resolving the issue extends beyond returning a house or plot of land, the experts said. It is also essential to restoring legal certainty and protecting owners, displaced people and heirs, while balancing original property rights with legitimate interests subsequently acquired in good faith.
FJ/MF
