Syria Repeals 1958 Property Seizure Law
The Syrian People’s Assembly has officially repealed Law No. 143 of 1958, a legislative move aimed at aligning current regulations with the constitutional declaration. The law had previously granted the Minister of Education the authority to seize real estate and land deemed necessary for the construction of schools, institutes, and other ministry-affiliated facilities.
Abdul Nasser Houshan, head of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee in the People’s Assembly, stated that the decision reflects a broader official effort to remove legislation that is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitutional declaration.
Houshan clarified that the repeal does not carry any retroactive effect. He emphasized that the move does not alter the legal status of properties previously seized under the law, nor does it impact existing school buildings. Explaining the legal rationale, he noted that standard constitutional and legal principles dictate that laws do not apply retroactively unless explicitly stated. Consequently, the repeal is intended to remove the legislation from the current legal framework without creating any new rights for former property owners to reclaim their assets or challenge existing titles, especially given that these legal statuses have been settled since the 1950s.
Providing historical context, Houshan explained that Law No. 143 of 1958 was originally based on Egyptian Law No. 521 of 1955, dating back to the period of the union between Syria and Egypt. At the time, the legislation granted the Minister of Education broad discretionary powers to seize any property considered necessary to fulfill the ministry’s objectives. Although the law had not been actively utilized in recent times, its continued presence in the legal code necessitated a formal decision to rescind it.
In a related clarification, the head of the Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee underscored the importance of distinguishing between the concepts of “expropriation” and “seizure.” He explained that the repealed law fell under the category of “seizure.”
Expropriation, by contrast, is conducted according to specific legal regulations to serve the public interest, such as the construction of schools, hospitals, or roads, and mandates fair compensation for property owners. The seizure process outlined in the repealed law lacked these specific legal safeguards, including the stringent requirements for public interest or the guarantee of fair compensation that characterize modern expropriation law.
Source: Syria Focus Arabic
