At the outset, it is necessary to define the crime of genocide after referring to the relevant legislative texts governing it. Foremost among these texts is the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948. After obtaining the twenty ratifications required pursuant to Article XIII of the Convention, it entered into force on 12 January 1951. The Preamble to the Convention refers to General Assembly Resolution No. 96 (1946) and affirms that genocide is a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and purposes of the United Nations, condemned by the civilized world, and that the liberation of humanity from this odious scourge requires international cooperation. Genocide is defined in Article II of the Convention as the intentional destruction, in whole or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. The International Court of Justice has affirmed that states can indeed commit the crime of genocide and that the Court may adjudicate such disputes pursuant to Article IX of the Convention. Several cases alleging the commission of genocide have been brought before the Court; however, only one resulted in a final judgment, namely the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro. In 1998, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted, specifying the crimes within the Court’s jurisdiction as the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The first of these crimes is genocide, followed by crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression (Article 5). After enumerating the Court’s jurisdiction, the Statute defines the crime of genocide in specific terms, providing as follows: “For the purpose of this Statute, ‘genocide’ means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group” (Article 6). On 8 December 2024, the dictatorial regime in Syria, led by Bashar al-Assad, fell, and opposition forces assumed control of the country. International support for the new ruling authority subsequently began, purportedly in deference to the existing reality and under claims that the situation constituted an internal Syrian matter. In the period following this date, the new authority revealed its true nature, which had already become apparent during the terrorist events that spread throughout Syria beginning in 2011 and thereafter, extending beyond its borders into Lebanon and Jordan, and more dangerously into Iraq after 2014. This resulted in the fall of Mosul, Anbar, and many western regions into the hands of terrorists represented by the criminal ISIS movement. Just as this movement pursued its sectarian terrorist activity in Iraq, openly targeting the Shiite majority and the Yazidis through acts aimed at genocide, it began carrying out similar or even more brutal acts against minority components of the Syrian people merely on the basis of differences in belief. These actions commenced immediately upon assuming power and reached their peak after 6 March 2025, in full view of the civilized world amid the widespread presence of social media across the globe. It should be noted that the head of the authority managing these terrorist acts (Ahmad al-Sharaa) was among those who participated in terrorist activities in Iraq and is considered one of the prominent figures who were previously detained. The terrorist events to which the Druze were subjected, as well as the sectarian killings and brutal torture inflicted upon the Alawites in the Syrian coastal region—documented audiovisually—require little effort from any investigator to identify the evidence and documentation proving the crime of genocide and its perpetrators, foremost among them the primary figure administering the country, the terrorist (Ahmad al-Sharaa). All of this necessitates caution and vigilance in confronting the risks of the terrorist movement’s expansion beyond Syrian territory into other states, particularly Iraq, given the expertise possessed by the terrorist organization in this regard and the existence of supportive terrorist incubators. Accordingly, it is proposed that the Iraqi government initiate the necessary legal procedures to communicate with international judicial bodies in order to begin applying international legal rules against the perpetrators of genocide in Syria, in accordance with the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. This falls within Goal 16 of the Sustainable Development Goals: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions. Asst. Prof. Qasim Mohammed Al-Haimas Almustaqbal University / College of Law