Syria faces one of the largest missing persons crises in the world. Estimates from the Syrian government suggest that between 130,000 and 300,000 individuals have been disappeared over nearly five decades, the majority since 2011, in a country of approximately 23 million people. This places Syria among the most affected contexts globally, both in absolute and relative terms. Nearly every Syrian family has been affected by disappearances. Addressing this crisis is therefore not only a humanitarian imperative, but also central to any meaningful process of truth, justice, stabilization, peacebuilding, and recovery.
The fall of the Assad regime in December 2024 has created an unprecedented opening to address this crisis. For the first time, it has become possible to conduct search efforts on Syrian soil and to engage directly with families of the missing in their country. There is also a new national mechanism dedicated to clarifying the fate and whereabouts of the missing, the Syrian National Commission on Missing Persons (NCMP), which was established by presidential decree in May 2025.
As the head of the Independent Institution of Missing Persons in the Syrian Arab Republic (IIMP), established by the United Nations General Assembly in 2023 and mandated to clarify the whereabouts of the missing and support their families, I have witnessed both the scale of the challenge and the emergence of new possibilities. This moment presents a critical opportunity to apply lessons learned from other contexts and to avoid repeating past mistakes. The analysis and recommendations throughout this article draw directly from my experience working on these complex and demanding issues across diverse contexts.
From Advocacy to Global Norms
For decades, families of the missing across the globe have led the search for their loved ones, demanding truth, justice, and recognition. Women—because they are overwhelmingly women—have tirelessly sought to locate their family members, an anguishing and exhausting process. Families have demanded clear and immediate answers—an “immediate” that has stretched unbearably long.
The mobilization by these families has been the principal catalyst for normative and institutional developments—the adoption of laws and treaties, the creation of specialized national and international search mechanisms, and the development of public policies.
The international community and individual states have recognized enforced disappearance as a distinct violation, defined as the deprivation of liberty by state agents, or by individuals or groups acting with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of the state, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation or concealment of the person’s fate or whereabouts (See: the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance; the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance; and the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons). The concept of a “missing person” expands beyond enforced disappearance. It encompasses not only individuals whose fate or whereabouts are unknown as a consequence of a crime or a human rights violation committed by state or non-state actors, but may also include persons presumed missing in contexts marked by conflict, violence, instability, institutional collapse, or natural disasters. This broader concept reflects the realities faced by families as well as practitioners working across different contexts who are looking for thousands of missing persons.
The Four Elements
Decades of collective experience has shown that responding effectively to large-scale patterns of disappearance requires concrete action through the implementation of evidence- and practice-based knowledge. Most countries with tens and hundreds of thousands of missing persons have created, or already had in place, specialized extraordinary search mechanisms—national, international, or hybrid. We also know that the search for missing persons is not only an ethical or humanitarian undertaking; it is also inherently political, financial, technical, and ultimately transformative in character. The issue of the missing permeates society as a whole, and responding to it in a responsible manner, based on proven methodologies, is central to processes of stabilization and peacebuilding. And yet, comparative shows there are still numerous misconceptions worldwide surrounding the search for the missing—namely, that it can be done rapidly; that mass graves can or should be immediately exhumed; that DNA is the sole solution; that a single database can resolve the issue; or that the process can be accomplished through funding or laboratories, without more. It has also often wrongly assumed that the task can or should be managed by a single entity, whether national or international. While some of these assumptions may seem intuitive, experience has consistently shown them to be inaccurate, particularly when not embedded within a comprehensive, multidisciplinary, and coordinated strategy.
In my experience leading, coordinating with, and advising national search mechanisms, four elements are indispensable to improving the chances of providing answers to families in contexts where tens or hundreds of thousands remain unaccounted for. First, there must be genuine political will on the part of both the state and the international community. Second, there must be sustained efforts to build and preserve trust with families of the missing and among broader stakeholders. Third, access to and sharing of the broadest possible range of information between involved entities is essential. And fourth, technical methodologies and procedures designed specifically for large-scale search operations must be established and implemented. Of course, as Syria clearly illustrates, these elements must be understood as operating within a broader framework of state obligations.
I. Political Will
Political will on the part of the state includes first acknowledging the existence of a disappearance crisis that requires extraordinary and specialized mechanisms; engaging genuinely with families; enacting specific legislation and reforming existing laws; and resolving institutional tensions. It also entails allocating adequate resources to build institutional infrastructure and investing in specialized national capacities. It requires adopting as well large-scale search methodologies. Ultimately, a robust institutional framework—anchored in sustained legal authority and reliable funding—enables search processes to advance consistently and effectively.
Political will is equally necessary beyond national borders, requiring effective coordination and sustained collaboration with specialized international and technical organizations, as well as continued engagement by the international community. Such engagement must be both political and financial, supporting a clear public policy capable of addressing a large-scale, multidisciplinary process over the short, medium, and long term. It also demands concrete measures to facilitate the sharing of information among national and international stakeholders.
The search for the missing in contexts with thousands of cases does not occur in a vacuum. Countries facing disappearance crises often confront broader challenges, particularly in contexts of ongoing conflict or transition (as is certainly the case in Syria). Urgent needs include financial, health, housing, educational, infrastructural, and security concerns, alongside demands for truth and justice. Addressing these while advancing the search for the missing is integral to rebuilding the social fabric and preventing recurrence.
II. Trust
The greater the trust among all relevant actors, the more freely information flows, the faster the processes are implemented, and the higher the likelihood of providing answers.
The information and accumulated knowledge held by families and civil society organizations, as well as their participation and confidence, constitute essential components of any search process. Building trust between national authorities and families of the missing in contexts marked by violence and political transition is challenging but achievable. It requires engagement, transparency, inclusivity, careful management of expectations and accountability.
The search process typically must involve a wide range of domestic institutions, including prosecutorial authorities, judicial bodies, forensic services, law enforcement agencies, military institutions, civil registries, legislative actors, and dedicated search mechanisms. Trust among these entities is essential for ensuring access to information, enabling the effective implementation of processes, and the development of a credible and coherent state response.
At the international level, specialized institutions must be able to coordinate and share information. Trust amongst international actors enhances not only the outcomes of search efforts, but also the prospects of financial and political support for ongoing search efforts. To maintain cooperation and trust at this level, it is crucial that international actors recognize and respect national ownership of the search process, also bearing in mind that national authorities bear the primary responsibility to the crisis. Undoubtedly, building trust requires recognition that the search process should be led at the national level, given that primary responsibility of the national authorities, as well as the fact that they possess the greatest access to information. At the same time, national authorities must recognize that this process cannot be carried out in isolation, and that decades of accumulated experience available at the international level must be taken into account and applied jointly, with the shared aim of providing answers to the families of missing persons as promptly as possible.
III. Information
At its core, most times disappearance entails the deliberate—or at times de facto—suppression and fragmentation of information, regardless of its source. Relevant materials may reside in official archives, witness testimonies, journalistic investigations, administrative records, or other repositories. Each constitutes only a partial trace; taken together, they form an intricate mosaic. No single actor holds all the pieces, and those who do are not always willing to share them.
Numerous of the missing persons cases worldwide show that, had information been centralized or shared in real time, missing persons might have been located within days or months rather than years. These examples underscore that information-sharing is not abstract; it has a direct and tangible impact on families. Yet no country has successfully established a unified, comprehensive database on missing persons. Information remains dispersed among actors for legal, ethical, technical, or political reasons.
Families and civil society organizations often harbor deep mistrust toward authorities or other actors tasked with supporting them. National authorities—prosecutors’ offices, military institutions, police forces, hospitals, and detention centers—frequently invoke data protection, prosecutorial confidentiality, or national security to justify withholding information from one another and, often, from families. Even where dedicated search mechanisms exist, information remains fragmented and requires sustained legal, technical, and political efforts to coordinate and share. International organizations also face constraints arising from limitations within their mandates, the absence of family consent, or sometimes the reluctance of civil society actors to share information with them.
Over the past three decades, debates and regulatory frameworks on data protection and data sharing have developed significantly (see: here, and here). However, they have not fully engaged with all the specificities of the humanitarian mandate to search for missing persons—one that requires a distinct analytical and operational approach, while often intersecting with criminal justice systems and prosecutorial authorities.
Pending the establishment of comprehensive mechanisms, all actors involved in the search process should at least operate within structured arrangements identifying which institution holds which categories of information. Even knowing that a particular authority is actively searching for a specific person is a meaningful first step toward generating answers for families and society. The central challenge, therefore, is to establish communication channels that clarify who holds what information and how it can contribute to locating missing persons. Search is inherently a collective endeavor—no one can do it alone.
IV. Methodology
Once access to information has been secured, the subsequent challenge lies in the capacity to analyze, compare, contextualize, and systematically integrate that information into methodological frameworks designed for large-scale search operations, tailored to the specific context.
Over decades, experience has generated critical lessons regarding what works and what does not. Some initiatives, even if well-intentioned, have ultimately fallen short of delivering the expected results. The publication of photographs or documents, or the opening of a mass grave, if undertaken outside a carefully structured process, may generate isolated leads, but rarely delivers comprehensive answers to families and society at large. On the contrary, in certain instances, such actions delay the process of locating other missing persons. In many cases, they also retraumatize the families.
An extraordinary challenge—such as the disappearance of hundreds of thousands—demands extraordinary solutions, implemented through extraordinary mechanisms. Responses to crises of this magnitude cannot be fragmented, nor can they rely solely on ordinary national systems or on the international community acting in isolation.
We cannot assume that ordinary national justice and forensic systems are capable of simultaneously addressing mass disappearance crises and the routine demands arising from daily violence. Yet, all too often, the initial instinct of countries and societies facing such crises is precisely that: to rely on existing processes, methodologies, infrastructure, and personnel. The need to strengthen ordinary services—both to address daily and isolated cases and to ensure non-repetition—is indisputable. Yet this does not mean that conventional systems and structures possess the technical, legal, or methodological capacity to manage the extraordinary and highly technical process of searching for thousands of missing persons. What is required instead is a specialized, multidisciplinary approach and methodology designed for mass or generalized search efforts.
The international community, acting in isolation, is likewise operationally unable and politically constrained in resolving missing persons crisis of this magnitude in a sustained and durable manner. While notable examples of international engagement exist. Large-scale search is a complex, medium- and long-term undertaking that can only be carried out with a clear understanding of the local context. And of course, most of the highest-value information remains within national borders. The most essential role of the international community and organizations working on missing persons is to support and accompany national efforts in countries facing this crisis in the design and coordinated implementation of search processes: contributing with operational expertise through specialized entities, and providing critical political and financial support.
There are no quick fixes or magical formulas. A clear understanding of time—its weight, its demands, and its scale—is fundamental. Yet we know that, for families of the missing around the world, there is no time; we are already late. But the establishment of a large-scale methodology is not a “fastidious” or merely administrative step; it constitutes action. Such processes must be designed and implemented with the meaningful participation of families, whose engagement is essential to building systems capable of generating credible and trustworthy answers.
While every search must be tailored to its specific context, comparative experience with large-scale or generalized search, followed by targeted and individualized lines of inquiry, has shown that this approach remains, to date, the most effective means of improving the chances of providing answers to families of the missing, as illustrated by local or national experiences in countries such as Argentina, Guatemala and Mexico. In some instances, this approach has been implemented by civil society organizations rather than state authorities (see, e.g., the work of the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team and the Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation).
Looking Ahead
Syria presents an opportunity, in the search for missing persons, to apply the most valuable lessons from past experiences around the globe and to avoid repeating the same mistakes. Sharing these lessons is a moral obligation for those of us who have lived through them or witnessed them firsthand. It is essential to remember that this work concerns suspended lives—not only those of the missing, but also those who live in anguish as they continue to wait for them, and the broader societies that feel their absence.
Just over a year after Syrians began to rewrite their history and open pathways of hope toward a different future, new possibilities are emerging despite many local and regional challenges. Sixteen months ago, it was inconceivable that search efforts could be conducted directly on Syrian territory, or that a national institution dedicated to this task would be established—one with which national and international actors could begin to collaborate.
Today, as we implement our broad mandate alongside families and allies, the Independent Institution on Missing Persons is also developing concrete projects with the Syrian National Commission for Missing Persons. Through these initiatives, and with the understanding that a trustworthy network must be built among all those involved, operational and methodological lessons are being shared, and support is offered for the development of technical, legal, and procedural frameworks for the search for missing persons and assistance to their families.
As families frequently remind us, searching for the missing is not about words—it is about action. It is also about processes. Rebuilding a country, creating institutions, and achieving social reconciliation are processes that unfold in stages. The search for missing persons is no different: it is a collective undertaking requiring a clear methodology grounded in a multidisciplinary mass-search approach, access to information, trust and political will.
Searching for missing persons is a complex, collective, long-term, and fundamentally humanitarian issue. Accounting for the missing is also intrinsically linked to the right of families to truth, and should be conceived as a justice issue in the broader sense of the concept. It must also run in parallel with the many demands related to rebuilding the state. Our responsibility is to help implement an integrated, inclusive, and methodologically sound process over the medium and long term, while supporting the families of the missing.
There remains, without question, a long road ahead. Yet in a country shaped by a rich history—marked by hope, tensions, and challenges, and by both past and present demands—one truth stands out with clarity: the tireless determination of families to find their loved ones and the resilience of a society striving to rebuild itself. Truth and the search for all those who are missing constitute a fundamental pillar of any meaningful process of collective healing and reparation.
