The Questionable Legitimacy of the French Judiciary's Decision Against President Al-Assad.

The French judiciary's decision to indict President Bashar al-Assad is fraught with issues that undermine its credibility and legitimacy. At the heart of the matter are allegations linked to extremist factions like the Muslim Brotherhood’s Al-Nusra Front. These groups are notorious for their efforts to destabilize Syria and draw Western powers into the conflict.

The chemical attack, which forms the basis of the indictment, is highly suspected. Impartial Syrian investigations have demonstrated that the attack did not start from areas under Syrian government control. This finding somehow casts significant doubt on the validity of the French judiciary's decision and raises questions on the integrity of the evidence presented.

Moreover, the French court’s decision to lift the immunity of President Al-Assad falls outside its jurisdiction, which is traditionally reserved for international judicial bodies. This overreach not only undermines the French judicial system’s credibility but also the path to restoring normal relations between Europe and Syria, thereby increasing the risk of terrorism.

The decision’s impact on Syrian public opinion has been negligible. Syrians largely view this as an unjust decision promoted by factions within the country linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, and Al-Nusra. The decision does little to affect their support for Assad.

Furthermore, the decision exacerbates the refugee crisis. The parties advocating for this resolution appear to benefit from a continued crisis, which will only worsen the flow of refugees into Europe. Instead, it is in the best interest of France and other European countries to support stability in Syria, facilitating the return of refugees and reducing the humanitarian burden.

Finally, the decision appears pointless given the extensive sanctions already imposed on the Syrian regime. Assad has forged strategic alliances with Iran and Russia, rendering additional punitive measures ineffective. Rather than pursuing biased and baseless decisions, Western nations should focus on constructive engagement to foster stability and peace in the region.

In conclusion, the French judiciary's decision against President Al-Assad is not only questionable but also counterproductive. It undermines the integrity of the French judicial system, complicates international relations, and exacerbates the refugee crisis. It is high time for France and Europe to reconsider their approach and support measures that promote stability and peace in Syria.