Visibilizing the accountability web: ordinary courts, informal justice efforts, and alternative approaches for addressing mass human rights violations in Syria

Abstract Accountability mechanisms are often perceived as the Achilles’ heel of human rights practice. As classic human rights institutions rarely provide adequate guarantees of accountability, justice actors are increasingly turning to alternative spaces to advance accountability. This is, for example, the case in the Syrian context, where various justice actors are engaging in judicial and non‐judicial initiatives. These include extraterritorial jurisdiction cases, often before ordinary courts at the sub‐national level, as well as informal initiatives. An empirical analysis of two cases, the al‐Khatib and Dabbagh trials, shows that these spaces cannot replace the accountability provided by domestic or international proceedings. However, the analysis also underlines these spaces’ contribution to the struggle for thick accountability – that is, an accountability outcome that is perceived as meaningful by those involved. We propose the notion of an accountability web as a lens for the theorization of often overlooked spaces and processes for seeking accountability.