On December 4, 2025, the Youssef al-Azma suburb in Rural Damascus witnessed a sudden eviction campaign carried out by the Census Committee affiliated with the interim authorities of “Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham,” targeting a number of homes inhabited by civilians, including former officers in the regime’s army, most of whom are from the Alawite sect.
The affected groups varied between homeowners and residents, whether family members or tenants. Many of them affirmed that they possess official documents proving ownership or hold legal rental contracts; nevertheless, the eviction orders included them. Residents indicate that the measure affected even those with a clear legal status, leaving them anxious and fearful of losing their homes without any publicly announced legal justification.
According to residents’ testimonies, the Census Committee arrived at the homes after official working hours, taking advantage of a four-day public holiday, and demanded immediate evacuation. They were informed that refusal to leave would prompt intervention by security patrols. This came about a month after the committee’s first visit, during which it said it was conducting a property survey and verifying documents.
In contrast, some residents offered a different account, saying that the committee visited the neighborhood a month earlier, verified ownership documents and rental contracts, and granted a grace period only to those who lacked official papers and were residing in the suburb irregularly.
These developments come amid an overall climate of increasing restrictions on Alawite residents in Damascus and its surroundings, according to locals, amid fears that the eviction orders may be part of a broader plan to redistribute the population or reorganize the area through non-transparent mechanisms. The committee’s methods also raise additional questions about the reasons for the evictions, their legitimacy, and the procedures undertaken to implement them.
What occurred represents a potential case of forced eviction, especially given that residents were threatened with security force intervention despite possessing ownership or residency documents—something that requires official clarifications and legal guarantees to protect their right to housing and to prevent expulsion without a clear legal basis.
