Fadel Abdulghany
Recognizing minority rights within constitutional frameworks is a fundamental pillar for establishing political legitimacy and strengthening social cohesion in pluralistic societies. In Syria, Presidential Decree No. 13, issued by President Ahmed al-Sharaa in January 2016, marked a significant turning point in the country’s constitutional trajectory, as it included explicit recognition of the identity, language, and citizenship rights of Syrian Kurds, and paved the way for dismantling the foundations of oppression that had accumulated over decades of systematic exclusion.
Based on the constitutional declaration issued in March 2025, this decree establishes a model of national unity that is not based on imposing ethnic or linguistic homogeneity, but rather on recognizing diversity and integrating it within the concept of equal citizenship.
This decree also represents the first official recognition of Kurdish rights in Syrian legal history, signaling a qualitative shift from approaches of national exclusion to a civic nationalism rooted in the principle of citizenship. This article examines the theoretical foundations, legal structure, and constitutional implications of this recognition, arguing that while the inclusion of fundamental Kurdish rights is a necessary and commendable step forward, its transformative potential remains contingent upon constitutional enshrinement, comprehensive implementation, and sustained political commitment.
The Constitutional Declaration issued in March 2025 constitutes the legal framework from which Decree No. 13 derives its authority and legitimacy. Article 7(3) of the Constitutional Declaration stipulates the state’s commitment to guaranteeing the cultural diversity of Syrian society and protecting the cultural and linguistic rights of all Syrians, thus establishing a positive constitutional obligation that goes beyond mere tolerance to a duty of effective support. This provision entails an enforceable institutional obligation, requiring state bodies to enable the cultural expression of minorities in practice, not merely to grant it formal permission.
The conceptual framework of this recognition reflects a significant theoretical shift from exclusionary nationalism to inclusive pluralism. While previous Syrian constitutions defined national identity exclusively in Arabic terms and treated Kurdish identity as inherently incompatible with the concept of the Syrian nation, the new framework establishes a pluralistic view of national belonging. Article 1 of the decree stipulates that Kurdish citizens are an integral part of the Syrian people and that their cultural and linguistic identity is an authentic and inseparable component of Syrian national identity.
This conception of unity, as achieved through diversity rather than homogeneity, is consistent with contemporary theories of civic nationalism that base national identity on shared citizenship and political affiliation, rather than on similarity of ethnic origin or language.
Furthermore, Article 48 of the Constitutional Declaration stipulates transitional justice obligations, requiring the state to repeal all exceptional laws that have harmed the Syrian people and violated human rights. This provision establishes direct constitutional authority to nullify the consequences of discriminatory measures related to the 1962 census, which stripped tens of thousands of Syrian Kurds of their citizenship, perpetuating statelessness across generations. The decree activates this constitutional mandate by definitively repealing these exceptional laws and restoring citizenship unconditionally.
The substantive provisions of Decree No. 13 also establish a multi-layered framework for protecting Kurdish rights. Perhaps the most important of these provisions is the adoption of Kurdish as a national language, granting it public status and legal legitimacy after decades of systematic suppression. This recognition also enshrines the right to education in Kurdish as an inherent right, not an optional privilege, necessitating the provision of institutional resources, policy frameworks, and funding to ensure its realization.
The distinction between the official language and the national language is of paramount importance. While Arabic remains the sole official language of the state, recognizing Kurdish as a national language with public status allows for its teaching in both public and private schools in areas where Kurds constitute a significant portion of the population. This regional approach introduces a degree of flexibility without creating exclusive linguistic zones, enabling its application in mixed-population environments while providing a clear and structured framework for Kurdish language instruction in predominantly Kurdish regions.
The provision for restoring nationality achieves extremely important legal goals by eliminating the structure that produces statelessness. Unlike previous partial reforms that were limited to certain categories of stateless persons, the scope of the decree explicitly extends to those whose births were never registered, thus dealing with the most profound form of legal exclusion.
The principle of full equality of rights and duties also establishes a binding obligation to prohibit discrimination and provides enforceable guarantees of equality in all areas of citizenship. This approach aligns with the principles of international human rights law, which affirm that statelessness resulting from arbitrary deprivation of nationality makes granting or restoring nationality more consistent with international standards than simply determining statelessness.
Despite its historical significance, the decree contains structural limitations that may weaken its transformative impact. As a presidential decree, it lacks the constitutional immunity that provides the highest degree of protection against potential future reversal or cancellation. This highlights the fragility of rights based on executive decisions, compared to those enshrined in the constitution. Rights enshrined in the constitution, and surrounded by rigorous amendment safeguards requiring enhanced majorities, enjoy far greater protection than those left to the discretion of the executive branch.
The absence of comprehensive compensation mechanisms represents an additional and equally significant constraint. Restoring citizenship, however important, is insufficient on its own to address the economic damage, educational deprivation, and psychological and social effects accumulated over decades of statelessness. In this context, transitional justice requires subsequent implementing legislation addressing material compensation, moral recognition, and social reintegration programs, thus complementing the framework established by the decree. Bridging the gap between stated aspirations and practical reality can only be achieved through sustained political will, the allocation of sufficient resources, and good governance.
