{{subst:delete2|image=File:Ahmed al-Sharaa and Mazloum Abdi.jpg|reason=The claim that this image is in the public domain is legally baseless, misleading, and entirely unsupported by Syrian copyright law. Arguments above rely on vague generalizations and incorrect assumptions rather than any actual legal evidence. Please read the law in the template given first before finalizing your decisions (here). ::* 1. Syrian Law Grants Automatic Copyright Protection to Photographs :Under Article 5 of Syria’s Copyright Law No. 12/2001, all photographs, including government portraits, automatically receive copyright protection from the moment of creation. The law explicitly states that the author (photographer) retains exclusive rights to the work, including its publication, distribution, reproduction, and modification. These rights are not limited to private individuals; they apply universaly unless the copyright holder explicitly waives them or the law provides a specific exemption. There is no exemption in Syrian law that states official government photographs are automatically in the public domain. The idea that government portraits are “usually” public domain is legally irrelevant because it is based on assumptions rather than statutory law. This argument may hold true in countries like the United States, where federal government works are automatically placed in the public domain, but Syria does not have a comparable legal framework. Wikimedia Commons cannot make exceptions based on wishful thinking—this image must be treated as copyrighted unless verifiable proof exists stating otherwise.  ::* 2. “Official Government Works” Do Not Include Photographs Under Syrian Law :One of the most common arguments, at least I could think of when reading the comments above, made by those supporting retention is that Article 4 of Syria’s copyright law exempts official government works from copyright protection. However, this argument is a complete misinterpretation of the law. Article 4 does indeed exempt certain government materials from copyright, but it specifically lists laws, regulations, decrees, international agreements, and judicial decisions. These are all text-based legal and administrative documents, not photographs. If Syrian law intended to make official government photographs public domain, it would have explicitly included them in this exemption. But it does not. This omission means that photographs, including official portraits, are still protected by default copyright rules, unless images posted prior to the date of restoration (June 11, 2004). Attempting to stretch the meaning of “official documents” to include visual works is legally dishonest and unsupported by Syrian copyright law. This image does not qualify as an exempted government work under the categories stated within this law and remains under copyright.  :
Even if we set aside the legal arguments for a moment, the method by which this image was obtained further discredits the public domain claim. This image was not sourced from an official Syrian government document or an official public domain archive—it was taken from Twitter/X (@G_CSyria). This alone should be enough to question its copyright status. Posting an image on social media does not mean it is automatically free for public use. Unless there is an explicit statement from the Syrian government releasing the image under a free license and/or said image being pertained within a document posted on Twitter/X, copyright remains in effect. There is no official declaration, written law, and no legal evidence that the Syrian government has permitted unrestricted use of this image (yet). As much as this image can be useful for Commons, accepting such would set a precedent for other similar images, concerning its relation to the decades long Syrian civil war. This is not a gray area.}} ~~~~