In March 2025, Syria’s transitional authorities issued a Constitutional Declaration meant to guide the country through a five-year transition period following the collapse of the Assad regime. While the document marks a symbolic break from the past—explicitly referencing human rights and cultural diversity—it is defined as much by its silences as by its affirmations. This commentary by LUGARIT identifies six critical omissions that, if unaddressed, risk weakening or derailing Syria’s post-conflict transition.

First, the Declaration fails to assert popular sovereignty or commit to democratic principles, omitting a foundational statement that authority stems from the people. This leaves a dangerous legitimacy vacuum filled instead by unelected interim leaders.

Second, the President is granted unchecked authority over both the judiciary and legislature, with no meaningful oversight mechanisms in place. This consolidation of power mirrors the authoritarianism Syria seeks to escape.

Third, the document eliminates the President’s ability to legislate by decree—a positive development—but does not establish an interim legislative mechanism. As a result, Syria lacks any functioning lawmaking body, stalling essential reforms and potentially pushing the executive toward extralegal action.

Fourth, the Declaration sets no timelines for forming institutions or implementing reforms. Without deadlines, the transition risks stagnation, eroding public trust and enabling the indefinite extension of interim rule.

Fifth, while acknowledging the need for a new permanent constitution, the Declaration provides no roadmap or procedure for drafting one. There is no mention of a drafting body, timeline, or public consultation, leaving this critical task vulnerable to delay or manipulation.

Sixth, the Declaration introduces ambiguity around the length of the transition. Though it states a five-year period, it also ties the transition’s end to the completion of a new constitution and elections. This lack of clarity creates legal uncertainty and risks indefinite extensions of the transitional phase.

Together, these omissions threaten to reproduce the very conditions the transition seeks to redress. Yet, the authors argue, there is still time to revise and strengthen the framework. The Declaration can be amended to restore legislative authority, establish clear timelines, and define a transparent constitutional process. For Syria’s transition to succeed, it must be grounded not only in symbolism but in a robust and participatory political structure—one that offers not just a reprieve from the past, but a credible path toward democratic renewal.