According to Kurdpress, the recent developments in the integration process of the "Syrian Democratic Forces" (SDF) with the Syrian government show that a serious dispute is forming over the future of the judicial structure in the remaining areas under the control of this force in Haskeh province. A difference that can become the main test of this process.

Local sources say that the spark of the recent tension was sparked when a delegation from the Syrian government entered the city of Hasakah and was able to take over the central court building of this city without serious problems. But the next day, when trying to carry out a similar action in Qamishlo, the same delegation faced the resistance of the judicial institutions affiliated to Qasd. Conflicting reports have been published about the details of this incident and each side presents its own narrative.

From the point of view of Damascus, the issue is clear. The Syrian government believes that the merger agreement reached in January requires the transfer of governing institutions to the central government and that the judiciary, as one of the main pillars of governance, is not negotiable and cannot remain under a parallel structure.

On the other hand, QSD emphasizes that what is going on is a "integration process", not a unilateral handover. According to those close to this group, the mechanism for the transfer of institutions should be determined by mutual agreement, not imposed by Damascus.

At the head of this dispute is the apparent effort of the QSD to preserve and integrate its judicial structure into the official Syrian system; A proposal that Damascus categorically rejected and says that no independent legal entity or exceptional judicial system will be accepted in any part of Syria.

This conflict is not limited to the control of court buildings. Over the past decade, the legal system in the areas under the control of the SDF has found important differences with the official structure of Syria in some areas. For example, polygamy is prohibited in these areas and different rules have been applied in the field of civil registration, including the registration of children. Those close to QSD say that these cases are not just administrative issues, but social and sensitive issues that require specific and gradual agreements, not an immediate return to the previous structure.

Another axis of dispute is the issue of judicial staff and court employees. It seems that Damascus plans to bring back some of the judges and employees who worked in these areas before the SDF rule, and at the same time, it will also investigate the possibility of recruiting some active forces in the judicial structure related to the SDF, if the legal conditions are met. However, there is also the issue of professional competence. A number of people who have worked in the courts affiliated to the autonomous administration in recent years have been trained in educational institutions in northeastern Syria; Institutions that the Syrian government does not recognize.

QSD and its allies consider the government's actions as an attempt to revive the government structures of the Bashar al-Assad era and even to bring back judges affiliated with the Baathist regime. Damascus, on the other hand, insists that what it is doing is merely implementing the agreement: returning the governing institutions to government control and then using qualified local forces. The importance of this dispute is due to the fact that the judicial system is not a separate part of the security issue. Courts are directly related to matters such as arrest, execution of sentences, control of police forces and security presence in the field.

It seems that the main problem lies in the difference in the perception of the concept of "integration" by the two sides. Qasd wants a model that maintains an important part of its practical influence and existing structures, and the integration is limited, gradual and in some areas merely symbolic. But Damascus considers this process to be the complete return of the central government's sovereignty over all strategic sectors; A process that leaves no room for parallel structure.

Therefore, the current disagreements do not necessarily mean the complete failure of the integration process, but a sign that the negotiations have entered the stage of general agreements to the stage of actual implementation; A stage in which cases such as courts, detention, security and the means of exercising power will determine whether this process will stabilize or return to confrontation once again.