Syrian Telecom, formally designated as the Syrian Telecommunications Establishment, functions as a telecommunications entity under the authority of the Syrian government. It is organised as a joint-stock company that is wholly owned by the state.

The Syrian Arab Republic does not impose functional separation on operators with significant market power (SMP) in the telecommunications sector. However, an obligation for accounting separation has been in place since 2010. Art. 42.b of the Telecommunication Law (Law No. 18 of 2010) stipulates that licensees with significant market power must maintain separate accounts for their services, ensuring that the costs and revenues associated with each service are presented distinctly. This must be achieved through a cost-modelling accounting system approved by the regulatory authority. The authority also retains discretion to determine which services are subject to these provisions.

Art. 11.6 of Law No. 51 stipulates that any individual or entity seeking to participate in a tender must satisfy the following condition: they shall neither own any plant, enterprise, or branch office in Israel, nor hold any interest in a firm or organisation established therein. They must not be party to any contract for manufacturing, assembly, licensing, or technical assistance with any Israeli firm, organisation, or body, nor engage in such activities within Israel either directly or through intermediaries.

Reports indicate that corruption within Syria’s public procurement processes is widespread, affecting territories under the control of various factions involved in the civil conflict. These procurement mechanisms are systematically exploited to advance the interests of government officials and affiliated business entities. In many instances, tenders are not publicly disclosed but are instead selectively distributed to individuals with political connections.

The Syrian Arab Republic is not a party to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). In fact, the country is not a member of the WTO.

Syria enforces a comprehensive boycott of Israel, which constitutes a total prohibition on Israeli investment in Syria rather than a mere restriction on foreign equity participation. The Arab League, of which Syria is a member, has maintained a boycott of Israeli enterprises since its inception in 1948. Syrian law obliges compliance with, and cooperation in, this international boycott. In this context, Art. 1 of Law No. 286 of 1956 provides that it is prohibited for any natural or legal person to conclude, either directly or indirectly, any form of agreement with entities or individuals residing in Israel, affiliated with it by nationality, or acting on its behalf. It also prohibits dealings with domestic or foreign companies and establishments that maintain interests, branches, or general agencies in Israel.

Pursuant to Arts. 4 and 7 of the Executive Instructions for Investment Law No. 18, an investor is required to obtain an investment licence in order to establish a new economic enterprise within the communication and technology sector. The granting of such a licence constitutes formal authorisation to commence the establishment of the investment project. The Syrian Investment Agency issues the licence following a series of prescribed procedures, which include the submission of an economic and technical feasibility study for the proposed undertaking. In accordance with Art. 8, the investment licence shall only be conferred after the investor’s application has been duly examined by the competent authorities from a technical perspective.

Art. 6.4 of Law No. 18 of 2012 stipulates that, in cases where the patent applicant does not reside within the Syrian Arab Republic, it is mandatory to appoint a representative domiciled in the country to act on their behalf throughout the patent application and registration procedures. In addition, Art. 4 outlines the categories of individuals and entities eligible to benefit from the provisions of the law, subject to the prevailing national legislation and international agreements to which Syria is a party. Specifically, the law applies to Syrian nationals regardless of their place of residence, as well as to non-Syrians who maintain a headquarters or domicile within Syria or are nationals of countries that are parties to industrial property agreements in force in Syria. Additionally, it applies to nationals of Arab League member states, provided that reciprocal treatment is afforded.

The Syrian Arab Republic is a party to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

The Syrian Arab Republic has a copyright regime under the Law on the Protection of Copyright and Related Rights. However, the exceptions do not follow the fair use or fair dealing model, thereby limiting the lawful use of copyrighted works by third parties. Arts. 33 to 46 set out a closed list of exceptions, which include, among others, temporary copies made as part of broadcasting or technical transmission; quotation for purposes of teaching or research with attribution; limited reproduction within non-profit educational institutions; and the making of backup or interoperable copies of computer programs by a lawful user.

It is reported that there is a severe shortage of original software editions in Syrian markets. As a result, the majority of software available consists of unauthorised copies. Software piracy is therefore practised not only by consumers but also by marketers. In addition, it is reported that software piracy is socially accepted in Syria, which undermines the enforcement of legal frameworks and contributes to a reluctance to implement deterrent regulations governing intellectual property rights.

The Syrian Arab Republic has not signed the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.

The Syrian Arab Republic has not signed the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Section 4 (Arts. 66–75) of Law No. 18 of 2012 establishes a comprehensive framework for the protection of trade secrets. Art. 66 provides that undisclosed information shall be protected where it possesses a confidential character, derives commercial value from its secrecy, and depends on measures adopted by its lawful owner to maintain such confidentiality. Art. 68.4 grants the lawful possessor the right to seek judicial recourse, while Art. 69.2 classifies the disclosure, possession, or use of such information by persons aware of their lack of authorisation as an infringement. Art. 75 states that, in respect of matters not expressly regulated under the provisions on undisclosed information, the rules applicable to invention patents shall apply mutatis mutandis.