It is reported that the Syrian Telecommunications and Post Regulatory Authority (SY-TPRA), the executive authority for the supervision and administration of services in the telecommunications sector, is independent from the government in the decision-making process.

Chapter VII of Syria’s Law No. 12 regarding the Protection of Electronic Personal Data on the Network regulates the cross-border transfer of personal data. Art. 15 prohibits the transfer, processing, or storage of personal data to any foreign or Arab state unless the receiving jurisdiction ensures an adequate level of protection, verified and authorised by the competent authority. However, paragraph (b) of the same article permits such transfers to jurisdictions lacking equivalent safeguards under specific conditions, including the explicit consent of the data subject, the preservation of life, provision of healthcare, fulfilment of contractual obligations, compliance with judicial requirements, protection of public interest, or implementation of bilateral or multilateral agreements to which Syria is a party. Art. 16 further allows controllers or processors to share personal data with counterparts abroad, subject to prior authorisation and the fulfilment of three conditions: compatibility of operational purposes, the existence of a legitimate interest, and assurance that the foreign entity maintains legal and technical protections equivalent to those prescribed in the law’s executive regulations.

The Syrian Arab Republic has not joined any agreement with binding commitments to open transfers of data across borders.

Law No. 12 regarding the Protection of Electronic Personal Data on the Network establishes a comprehensive regime for data protection in the Syrian Arab Republic. It grants rights to data subjects and designates the authority responsible for enforcing personal data protection.

Art. 3.a.1 of the Cybercrime Law mandates that internet service providers (ISPs) retain traffic data pertaining to all subscribers for a duration specified by the competent authorities. In addition, Art. 4 of the same legislation obliges ISPs to preserve copies of both traffic data and hosted digital content.

Art. 61 of the Law on Media stipulates that online media outlets are required to retain a copy of all published content in its various forms, as well as traffic data enabling the verification of the identity of individuals contributing to such content on the network, for a period determined by the Council. These data and materials shall be subject to professional confidentiality; however, they must be disclosed to the judicial authority upon request.

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.

Art. 41 of the Telecommunications Law stipulates that any licensee holding a dominant position within the market is obliged to accommodate all reasonable requests for access to its essential telecommunications facilities, in accordance with the procedures established by the regulatory authority and in a manner consistent with both the Reference Offer and the licensee’s disclosed future plans. In fulfilling this obligation, the licensee must apply equivalent conditions in comparable circumstances and act without discrimination. In addition, the authority may, in exceptional cases and for the purpose of ensuring interoperability, impose obligations upon licensees that do not possess a dominant position, requiring them to grant access to their essential telecommunications facilities under terms prescribed by the authority.
Essential telecommunications facilities, as defined in Art. 2, refer to those facilities owned, controlled, or provided by a limited number of licensees, the use of which is indispensable for other operators or service providers to deliver their services, given that duplication or substitution would not be technically or economically feasible. Such facilities include, inter alia, buildings, towers, antenna masts, cables, conduits, local loops, switches, easements, rights of way, and other elements as determined by the authority.

The Syrian Arab Republic is not a signatory of the 1996 World Trade Organization (WTO) Information Technology Agreement (ITA) nor the 2015 expansion (ITA II). In fact, the country is not a member of the WTO.

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.