“[W]e are in a punishment camp; it is a terrifying and horrible place. It is one big prison. The only thing we are asking for is to go home and be left alone.” These are the words of a resident of Al Hol camp, one of the most securitized and restrictive camps in Syria.
Due to the incredibly severe living conditions, some organizations and media outlets refer to Al Hol camp as a prison or a detention camp. About 40,000 individuals live in the camp, consisting of a mixed population of Syrian internally displaced persons (IDPs), Iraqi refugees, and nationals from more than 60 different countries. Iraqis make up the largest group, and the majority of the camp’s population is young: about 62 percent are under 18 and about 44 percent under 12. Many want to leave Al Hol camp to escape the dire living and security conditions, and to return home.
In May 2024, Iraq and the United Nations agreed to repatriate all Iraqis from Al Hol camp by 2027, and Iraq’s National Security Advisor recently urged all countries to repatriate their citizens from the camp, with the aim of closing it down soon. Providing a safe and voluntary repatriation and reintegration process for all individuals is part of a durable solutions approach to address the larger displacement crisis in Syria, and Iraq has been an example for the international community as it repatriates its own citizens.
However, the Iraqi government cannot achieve this alone; repatriating all individuals from Al Hol is much more nuanced and complicated, particularly when compared to other camps in the area, due to its history and securitized response. Camp residents are frequently suspected of being either affiliated with or supporters of the Islamic State (IS), resulting in significant stigma for them and their families. Significant barriers remain for their repatriation, and a collective effort and investment is needed from humanitarian actors, donors, and implicated governments to ensure the safe and long-term repatriation and reintegration of Al Hol returnees.
History of the camp
Al Hol camp, located approximately 13 kilometers from the Iraqi border in Al-Hasakeh in Syria, has experienced significant demographic shifts since its inception. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) initially established the camp in 1991 to host Iraq refugees fleeing from the Gulf War. The population decreased to just three families in 2003 but then increased again following the US invasion of Iraq. In 2013, the camp closed but then reopened in 2016 to host Syrian IDPs and Iraqi refugees displaced by the emergence of IS and anti-IS operations. In late 2018-early 2019, there was a massive shift in the camp’s demographics after the battles against IS in Hajin and Baghouz, cities in Syria’s Deir Ezzor. As a result, the camp’s population increased drastically from 9,454 individuals to about 73,520 individuals in less than six months. After these anti-IS battles, most young men found or caught were often presumed to be IS fighters or supporters and, as such, were sent to Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)-operated detention sites while their families, primarily women and children, were separated and taken to Al Hol camp.
As a result of its mixed history, the camp includes a small number of original residents who were present before IS, individuals who fled from IS, and individuals who are IS-affiliated. Given the scale in which individuals were relocated and displaced to Al Hol, there was no capacity or means for actors responding to the crisis to make any determinations regarding IS affiliation for each individual or household, which ultimately resulted in a broad securitized response and stigmatization. Today, the Democratic Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria (DAANES), the de facto authority controlling most of northeast Syria, oversees the camp.
Human rights conditions in Al Hol camp
According to the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, conditions in Al Hol camp are “dire and extreme” despite humanitarian intervention, and leading humanitarian organizations have noted that the environment is detrimental to children’s rights, including the rights to life, health, and education.
Camp residents face limited access to services and limited freedom of movement. This is even more pronounced in the Annex, a section of the camp where most nationals from other countries reside, as the SDF routinely and arbitrarily separates boys who appear to be reaching adolescence (about the age of 12) from their families and sends them to detention facilities. It is assumed that this harsh measure is based on fears of radicalization or that they might impregnate women or girls. Although valid security concerns exist, according to international human rights law, derogations from fundamental human rights must only be to “the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation.”
Repatriation from Al Hol
Against the dire human rights conditions in the camp, numerous international actors, including UN agencies such as UNICEF and OHCHR, humanitarian organizations, and human rights organizations have called on governments with nationals in Al Hol to facilitate voluntary, safe, and dignified repatriation.
Each population group in Al Hol camp has a unique repatriation procedure. The Iraqi government oversees repatriation for Iraqi refugees in coordination with the DAANES authorities and transfers them to Jeddah-1 camp in Iraq, a transition facility, with the aim of ultimately settling back into Iraq. DAANES authorities and community and tribal leaders in specific areas facilitate returns for Syrian IDPs back into DAANES-controlled areas in northeast Syria. Lastly, each respective government handles the repatriations of nationals from other countries in coordination with the DAANES authorities.
International legal standards
International legal standards help provide a framework to ensure there is a rights-based approach to the repatriation process. There are numerous international legal standards that can apply to the repatriation process; however, two key standards are the right to return and family separation.
The right to return is enshrined under binding international human rights law and is considered customary law under principles of international humanitarian and refugee law. A key element with the return of refugees is voluntariness, which must be assessed with regards to the conditions in an individual’s country of origin and the situation in the country of residence/asylum. This allows for an informed and free choice. Repatriation is not voluntary if the host country engages in coercion, reduces essential services, or relocates returnees to hostile areas, among other factors. So far, there have not been any located reports of instances where individuals are leaving the camp involuntarily.
Furthermore, family unification and safeguards against family separation are protected under international human rights and humanitarian law. The Convention on the Rights of the Child states that “the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration” in all actions concerning children and prohibits family separation.
Challenges with repatriation from Al Hol camp
Syrian IDPs, Iraqi refugees, and nationals from other countries all face unique barriers with the repatriation process. Nonetheless, key similar barriers remain, particularly community stigma, security fears, returning to conflict-affected areas, cases of undocumented children, and cases of family separation.
Community stigma is a common, great challenge for those wanting to leave Al Hol camp. For example, Abeer*, a Syrian IDP originally from Raqqa, returned to her community from the camp in 2021, but has faced great challenges reintegrating; she faced stigma as people in her community often remarked “you all are IS women, you’re an IS wife.” This stigma has a great impact on her possibility of reintegrating, as it leads to returnees being isolated from society and its services, including access to housing. Closely related to the stigma, returning home for many also comes with great security fears, particularly the fear of being arrested or detained.
Among the unwavering worries of Syrian IDPs and Iraqi refugees is the loss of their homes as many communities have been severely impacted by conflict. Both Iraq and Syria have had infrastructure damaged or destroyed, and there are no strong, robust structures in place to properly accommodate returnees. The conflicts in Syria and Iraq have also negatively impacted their economy and social services available to its residents. Today, Iraqis face prevalent poverty, and displacement has negatively impacted their access to savings and income.
The challenges to leave Al Hol camp are far more complicated for children without documents, including children born to unknown fathers, children born to parents who did not register their marriage and thus themselves are not registered, or children born in Syria after 2014, who are at heightened risk of not having their births recorded and being undocumented. Some children could have been born in former IS-controlled areas and while IS issued birth and marriage documents, those documents are not recognized, and many have been destroyed due to fear of affiliation. As these children remain without documents, proving their identity is a challenge and their access to resources including education, medical services, and humanitarian aid is limited.
Lastly, family separation is a key concern in repatriation trips. There have been calls by governments, especially with repatriation of nationals from other countries, to repatriate just the children. However, that would remove them from their families and contravene international human rights standards if separating them would be against the best interests of the child. For example, the Canadian government has asked mothers in Al Hol if they would just have their children repatriated; in March 2021, a four-year-old girl was repatriated to Canada without her mother. Furthermore, for camp residents who may have family members in detention facilities in northeast Syria, they may not want to leave Al Hol before knowing their loved ones’ fate and knowing if they will also be repatriated.
Recommendations and ways forward
There is widespread and global acknowledgement that residents of Al Hol camp must be repatriated and broad agreement on the importance of doing so. The UN Special Rapporteur on Counterterrorism and Human Rights emphasized the fundamental position that states “have a sustained obligation to repatriate their nationals,” in line with binding UN Security Council Resolutions 2178 of 2014 and 2396 of 2017.
With the repatriation process, humanitarian actors, donors, and states with nationals in the camp must recognize the challenges that each community and individual faces with leaving and reintegrating. Humanitarian actors responding to the situation should bolster services in Al Hol camp and areas of return, and improve coordination amongst each other. Donors must increase funding to support humanitarian actors in reintegration and durable solutions for returnees. Furthermore, states with nationals from other countries should improve efforts to provide individuals with the opportunity to voluntarily repatriate to their country of origin without delay.
Jessica Doumit is an attorney and is currently the Information, Counseling and Legal Assistance (ICLA) Research Adviser with the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) Syria Response Office.
Khadijah Joudeh is currently an ICLA officer at NRC’s Syria Response Office and was previously the Policy and Advocacy Officer, where she managed media and advocacy campaigns for the Syrian crisis.
The authors have submitted this piece in their personal capacities and, as such, the views reflected herein should not be regarded nor interpreted as reflecting those of the Norwegian Refugee Council.