The 'Smuggler' of Syrian Torture Archives Reveals His True Identity

In a “Asharq Al-Awsat” exclusive, Caesar’s twin witness warns against ignoring accountability

Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman
Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman
TT
20

The 'Smuggler' of Syrian Torture Archives Reveals His True Identity

Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman
Sami reveals to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman

For many years, the world only knew them by the aliases Caesar and Sami. Since 2014, these two names have been associated with documenting torture in Syrian prisons. The photos they smuggled out of Syria shook the world and prompted the United States to impose strict sanctions on the regime of former President Bashar al-Assad, under what became known as the “Caesar Act.”

These horrific photos documenting torture inflicted on detainees in Syrian prisons were used in courts in Western countries to convict Syrian officers on charges of torture and human rights violations.

But who is Sami, Ceasar’s “twin witness”?

In the first-ever interview he grants using his real name and photo, Sami revealed to “Asharq Al-Awsat” that he is Osama Othman, and that he is today head of the board of directors of the “Caesar Files Group Organization.”

He was working as a civil engineer when the Syrian revolution broke out in 2011, a revolution that began peacefully but quickly turned into a bloodbath after the forces of President Bashar al-Assad’s regime brutally suppressed it.

Sami lived in the Damascus countryside, which was divided between opposition factions and government forces. His area was under the control of factions that were part of what was known as the “Free Army,” but a person very close to him, who later became known as “Caesar,” was working in areas controlled by the regime forces. His job was not ordinary. His mission was to document deaths in Syrian security services departments. He documented them with photos: this body is missing a part of the head, this one is missing eyes, and that one has signs of severe torture. Some of the bodies showed signs of starvation.

He documented naked bodies with numbers. Thousands of photos. Women, men, and children. The crime of many of them was officially classified as “terrorism.” But how could a child’s crime be “terrorism”? The ugliness of the crimes prompted “Sami” and “Caesar” to work together to document what was happening in Syrian prisons and detention centers, specifically in Damascus, where “Caesar” worked and who sometimes documented the deaths of no less than 70 people a day. The two men began collaborating on collecting torture documents in May 2011. “Caesar” would smuggle the photos on a USB drive and give them to Sami in opposition areas.

“Dad... why are they sleeping without clothes?”

The “smuggler” of the Syrian torture archive is often reluctant to talk about himself and evades answering questions about his personal role in the story. However, after much persistence, he recounted a small portion of his experience. He told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Even my children did not know that they were the children of the man who carries the secret alias (Sami)... Once, as I was watching and searching for a photo among the evidence on my computer at night, I was surprised that my young son came to me and asked: Dad, why do these people sleep without clothes? In his innocence, he thought they were asleep. It is difficult to make your son live through this pain, so it was necessary for us to protect our children by protecting ourselves.”

Recalling his feelings at the time, he added: “When you make a very serious decision, why make others bear the responsibility for this decision? People you would not have consulted when you left. People who were only a few years old and people who were very old, you would’ve burdened them with fear without asking their permission at a moment when you decided that your responsibility was greater than your love for your family”.

The efforts of “Sami” and “Caesar” resulted in smuggling tens of thousands of photos of the bodies of torture victims out of Syria. The photos were revealed for the first time in 2014 after they left Syria. Today, the photos they smuggled have become part of the “indictment” against the security services that were affiliated with President Bashar al-Assad. In fact, the crimes were not limited to one prison or another. Torture practices were widespread in a way that leaves no doubt that it was a systematic policy adopted by the ruling regime, most likely with cover from the highest levels.

Asharq Al-Awsat asked Sami why he decided to break his silence and reveal his real name. He replied: “The Syrians know the answer to this question. I think the answer is obvious for most Syrians who were inside Syria and those who were outside it. The nature of the work and the nature of the documents that we left Syria with, which went through complex stages and many steps until we reached this blessed day, was the reason I was keen to hide my identity and the identity of many of the team members.

He added: “Today, thank God, we are in a completely different situation. We are in another place. In a new Syria. I wanted the Syrians to know what happened, and I also addressed them and the authorities in Damascus with what we hope the situation will be regarding the legal issues related to documenting and archiving data and evidence that will lead us to a stage of accountability and transitional justice to achieve stability in Syrian society. I think this matter deserves that we come out to tell the world what information and ideas we have so that we do not fall into the same problem in future generations.”

Sami adds: “I did not think, in truth, that I would live to say this word. Congratulations to our people in Syria on the fall of Assad. Congratulations to all the honorable people in this world on the fall of Assad. Thanks to everyone who stood with our revolution and shame on everyone who stood against it. After 14 years of working in secret and facing fear and anxiety, the sun of long-awaited freedom is now shining on Syria, for which our people paid a heavy price. A team of unknown heroes led a complex work full of dangers, that were not solely emanating from the regime. Today, they pledge to Syria to continue defending the dignity of the Syrian human being wherever he may be.”

The importance of accountability

Sami stressed the importance of “accountability” in Syria today, after the overthrow of the former regime, and says: “In this critical moment that Syria is going through as it prepares to enter a new phase after more than five decades of the Assad family rule, we call on the (new) government to work hard to achieve justice, hold perpetrators accountable, and ensure the dignity of human rights as a basis for building a better future that all Syrians dream of.”

He added: “We have witnessed during the past few days, and the rapid events that preceded them, a noticeable increase in the possibility of chaos spreading as a result of the remnants of the Syrian regime. Citizens randomly entering prisons and detention centers have led to the destruction or loss of very important official documents and records that reveal violations dating back decades.” He stressed that “the full responsibility for the destruction of evidence and the loss of the rights of detainees and survivors lies with the security officials of the former regime who have left and those who are still carrying out their duties and responsibilities, in addition to the current forces that are preparing to take power in Damascus. Although what is happening now can be expected after the liberation of the country from the Syrian regime, swift intervention has become urgent in collecting evidence and documents from the previous archives of security institutions, ministries and other government institutions, and this is what raises our concern about the continued work of the regime’s employees, which enables them to obliterate and destroy files of importance in revealing the crimes of the defunct regime.”

Baath Party documents

Sami believes that “all the institutions of the former regime hold documents of extreme importance, whether security, civil or military, and we do not ignore our concern about the obliteration of documents in all the branches and annexes of the Baath Party, which all Syrians know were security institutions par excellence, and those in charge of them practiced all forms of physical and moral intimidation against our great people throughout the years of the revolution.”

He adds: “We hope that this step will be taken with the participation of human rights organizations concerned with following up on issues related to research and investigation into human rights violations. The delay in revealing the official and secret detention sites that may exist in the liberated areas or areas that the armed forces of the Syrian opposition did not reach, in addition to testimonies and information circulating about the transfer of detainees from different prisons to unknown places before the fall of the regime, and the failure to provide the necessary medical and humanitarian assistance to the survivors who were released in the past days, reflects a disregard for the lives of these individuals.”

Sami called on the current authorities to “take immediate and transparent steps to reveal the fate of detainees and victims who died under torture in Syrian prisons and to suspend all those responsible for managing and operating prisons to begin urgently and immediately providing documents that clarify the names and numbers of victims to ensure the families’ right to know the fate of their loved ones. The Syrian people's right to access the truth cannot be compromised and is a duty of all concerned parties. Tolerating perpetrators of crimes under any pretext constitutes a clear violation of humanitarian and legal standards, and gives the green light to reproduce the tools of repression and violations that were practiced by the security services and are still in place.”

The Syrian human rights activist stressed that “achieving justice requires holding accountable all those involved in the crimes committed against the Syrian people, and achieving peace and stability in Syria depends on transitional justice as a fundamental principle at this stage. We call for a national reconciliation based on the principles of justice and accountability that guarantees the rights of all components of the Syrian people in a safe and stable environment that respects their dignity and meets their needs while ensuring that there is no impunity under any name.”

Opposition “imposed” on the people

Sami criticized parties in the Syrian opposition without specifying them, speaking about “failures” they had experienced. He said: “In light of the previous political failures of the opposition that were imposed on the Syrian people, we stress the need to make immediate reassuring statements about the vision and how to involve the people in decision-making and begin the process of building society in a way that respects the will of the Syrian people and guarantees their right to self-determination.”

He called on the current authority to consolidate and facilitate the work of all civil society institutions operating inside and outside Syria. “We also call on all of them to support efforts to achieve transitional justice in Syria effectively and to involve the Syrian people in developments on a regular basis, and to contribute to providing humanitarian and medical support to survivors of arrest and enforced disappearance, and to ensure that all those involved in crimes are held accountable and that impunity is not allowed.”

Sami also called for publishing and disseminating the names of the officers responsible for crimes against the Syrian people, and to monitor official and unofficial crossings, “as well as call on the official Syrian media institutions that have always contributed to the oppression of Syrians by distorting facts and glorifying the killers, to return to their natural function as a tool that strengthens the citizen's confidence in state institutions and a source of correct information”.

He adds: “It pains us to see our people searching for the names of their missing loved ones on social media pages, while state media is absent from performing its mission for which it only exists as a non-politicized service institution."

Crimes without a statute of limitations

Sami stressed that "crimes against humanity and crimes of genocide do not expire with a statute of limitations and cannot be tolerated under any circumstances”. He continues: “The Syria we dream of is a free Syria based on justice and equality. Transitional justice that precedes comprehensive national reconciliation is the only way to build the Syria of the future. We are all hopeful that Syria will be fine now. The Syria that our team left 11 years ago with thousands of tortured faces and disfigured bodies. Hundreds of which were separated from their eyes, who dreamed of being among us today”.

“In one of those faces, I saw the image of my father, mother, brothers and friends. In the darkness of the long nights, I looked at those faces and promised them that we would win." He listed his comrades killed by the regime, Yahya Shorbaji (a human rights activist), Ghiath Matar, Abdullah Othman, Burhan Ghadhban, and Nour al-Din Zaatar, saying: "To all of them, those I knew and those I did not know, may God have mercy on you. We have won (...) and Assad has fallen. May God have mercy on you and may the curse of history be upon Assad."

Unknown Heroes Behind Caesar

Sami refused to provide information about how he and Caesar left Syria and reached Western countries. However, he simply said, in response to a question: “I am Osama Othman, a civil engineer from the Damascus countryside. Many people know me even though I hide under the name (Sami). I had to use it as a shield to protect me during the period of hard work on these complex files that many unknown heroes contributed to creating.”

He added: “I am not the only one. There are many unknown heroes who contributed to getting us to this stage. The Caesar files required tremendous efforts in Europe through the courts, and in the United States through Syrian organizations that made tremendous efforts until they were able to push the US administration to issue what is called the Caesar Act or the Civilian Protection Act.”



Gemayel to Asharq Al-Awsat: Khaddam was Assad’s Stick to Apply Pressure

Relations between Gemayel and Khaddam were highly tense (Getty)
Relations between Gemayel and Khaddam were highly tense (Getty)
TT
20

Gemayel to Asharq Al-Awsat: Khaddam was Assad’s Stick to Apply Pressure

Relations between Gemayel and Khaddam were highly tense (Getty)
Relations between Gemayel and Khaddam were highly tense (Getty)

Late Syrian President Hafez al-Assad was a masterful negotiator, fiercely protective of his image and reputation. He was known for exhausting his guests with lengthy detours into history before addressing the substance of any talks.

Assad had an exceptional ability to restrain his anger, circling around an issue before striking again — often with calculated patience.

He avoided coarse language, allowing resentments to speak for themselves, but he never forgave those he believed had tried to derail his vision. Among them, according to accounts, were Yasser Arafat, Kamal Jumblatt, Bashir Gemayel, Amine Gemayel, and Samir Geagea.

In dealing with rivals and pressuring opponents, Assad often relied on a trusted enforcer: Abdel Halim Khaddam, his long-time foreign minister and later vice president. In the second part of his interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, former Lebanese President Amine Gemayel said Khaddam was Assad’s “stick,” used to assert control.

Many Lebanese politicians believed Khaddam’s bluntness was not personal, but rather a reflection of an official mandate from his mentor.

Assad rarely issued direct threats. Instead, he preferred subtle intimidation — as when he told Gemayel that his aides had once suggested blowing up President Anwar Sadat’s plane to prevent him from reaching Jerusalem.

Khaddam, the late Syrian strongman’s long-serving envoy, was known for humiliating both allies and foes who dared defy Damascus’ directives. His tactics were often unsettling — deliberately designed to leave visitors unnerved and pliant by the time they reached Assad’s office.

In a conversation in Paris during his retirement, Khaddam defended his hardline methods, saying they were not meant to insult but to prevent potentially dangerous confrontations. “The aim was to avoid escalation that could lead to security agencies taking over, which might have resulted in worse outcomes,” he said.

In the same meeting, Khaddam accused former Lebanese President Amine Gemayel of obstructing a political solution in Lebanon, calling him “hesitant and suspicious.”

He also acknowledged Assad was caught off guard when the Tripartite Agreement collapsed. The Syrian leader, Khaddam said, had not believed anyone in Lebanon would openly defy Syria — or the other Lebanese factions who had signed the accord.

“President Assad had many cards to play. President Sarkis had none,” recalled former Lebanese Foreign Minister Fouad Boutros, reflecting on the stark imbalance between Syria and Lebanon during Elias Sarkis’s presidency.

Assad, he said, had the power to topple or paralyze the Lebanese government before Sarkis even returned to Beirut. “Sarkis had no leverage over Assad,” Boutros noted. “But while Sarkis often showed flexibility, he would stand firm when asked to compromise Lebanon’s core principles.”

Boutros, who played a key role in Lebanon’s diplomacy during the civil war, said he had to exercise utmost restraint to keep Khaddam — Syria’s often abrasive envoy — from derailing talks with personal attacks or inflammatory language.

The dynamic, he suggested, was not unique to Sarkis. It also echoed the later, uneasy relationship between Gemayel and Assad.

Gemayel recalled a cold and confrontational relationship with Khaddam, describing him as “the stick and the poison” used by Assad to pressure Beirut into submission.

“There was no warmth between us from the beginning,” Gemayel told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“Khaddam used underhanded tactics to undermine the presidency and sow division within my team. While President Assad treated me with respect and politeness, he needed someone to apply pressure — and that was Khaddam,” he added.

Gemayel said Khaddam was behind all the pressure campaigns Syria waged against him — all with Assad’s full knowledge. “Assad played the courteous statesman. Khaddam handled the dirty work. Syria wanted me to sign agreements harmful to Lebanon’s interests, and Khaddam was the one tasked with forcing my hand.”

Despite Khaddam’s harsh demeanor, Gemayel said he never allowed him to overstep.

“I kept him in check. He didn’t dare cross the line with me. We were once in a meeting with President Assad, and Khaddam had been spreading ridiculous rumors beforehand. When he spoke up, I turned to Assad and said: ‘Mr. President, we have a problem with Khaddam. Please ask him to stop acting like a spy when dealing with us.’”

Khaddam, Gemayel said, tried to intimidate many Lebanese politicians — but not him.

“He was rude, even insolent to the point of absurdity. But he knew that if he said anything out of line with me, I would respond immediately.”

Assad’s Subtle Control and the Language of Minorities

Assad understood early on the fragility of Lebanon’s sectarian makeup. To him, the country was a meeting place for minorities — one that always needed an external patron to manage its wars and truces. He allowed for limited victories, but never total defeat, ensuring that no side could do without Syria’s oversight.

Assad sought to rule Syria indefinitely, with Lebanon as a backyard extension of his regime. Yet unlike his brother Rifaat, he avoided openly sectarian rhetoric or calls for partition. Rifaat, according to Gemayel, once suggested dividing both Syria and Lebanon along sectarian lines during a conversation with Lebanese leaders Walid Jumblatt and Marwan Hamadeh.

When asked whether he ever felt his dialogue with Assad was, at its core, a conversation between an Alawite and a Maronite, Gemayel replied: “No — that was Rifaat’s language. He used to say minorities must come together and show solidarity. But that narrative was never pushed by President Assad or his inner circle. It was always tailored to serve their own agenda.”

Assad’s political strategy was built on gathering leverage — and minority groups were central to that plan. His ties with Lebanon’s Druze community, and his clash with Druze leader Kamal Jumblatt, fit squarely within this framework. Assad relied on Syria’s own Druze population, as well as the Christian minority, to tighten his grip on the country’s diverse communities and align them under the banner of his regime.

“Assad had a firm hold on the minorities,” Gemayel said, adding that “he brought them all together to make them part of the Syrian system.”

Tensions between Syria’s Alawite leadership and the country’s Sunni majority were well known, Gemayel added, particularly through the candid rhetoric of Assad’s brother, Rifaat.

“Rifaat was open about the hostility between Alawites and Sunnis,” Gemayel said. “In his conversations with us, it was clear. But with President Assad, there was no visible sign of that. What lay beneath the surface, only God knows — but in our dealings with him, we never felt it.”

Gemayel Dismisses Reports of a Syria-Lebanon Confederation Proposal

Asked about longstanding claims that former Lebanese President Camille Chamoun had once proposed a confederation between Lebanon and Syria to Hafez al-Assad, Gemayel was quick to reject the idea.

“That’s absolutely not true,” he said. “President Chamoun would never have made such a proposal. A lot of things were said at the time. There were even reports that US envoy Dean Brown had suggested relocating Lebanon’s Christians to California — all of it nonsense, poetic talk with no grounding in reality.”

Gemayel also addressed one of the most controversial moments in US diplomacy during Lebanon’s 1988 presidential crisis: the phrase reportedly used by US envoy Richard Murphy — “Mikhael Daher or chaos.”

Daher, a Christian MP close to Damascus, had been floated as the only candidate acceptable to both Syria and the United States.

But Washington later distanced itself from the deal. The episode, Gemayel said, underscored a period in which American pressure aligned more with Syrian — and by extension, Israeli — interests, leaving Lebanon’s sovereignty hanging in the balance.

Gemayel confirmed that US envoy Richard Murphy did indeed issue the stark ultimatum in 1988. The phrase, which became emblematic of foreign interference in Lebanon’s presidential crisis, reflected what Gemayel described as Washington’s unwillingness to confront Damascus — despite acknowledging its destabilizing role in Lebanon.

“Yes, Murphy said it,” Gemayel affirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat.

“The Americans had a problem — they wanted Syria, and they didn’t. They knew Syria was playing a destructive role in Lebanon, but they didn’t want to challenge it. They kept trying to find common ground with Syria, not with us.”

According to Gemayel, the US saw Daher — a respected Christian parliamentarian close to Damascus — as a palatable compromise. “They thought Daher was a respectable figure who might be acceptable to the Lebanese, so they went along with Syria’s choice,” he said.

Washington, he added, had consistently prioritized pragmatism over principle in Lebanon, often aligning with whichever side could deliver results — even if it came at Beirut’s expense.

“It was the same with the May 17 Agreement with Israel,” Gemayel said, referring to the short-lived 1983 accord.

“The US couldn't pressure Israel, so Lebanon had to pay. And they couldn’t pressure Syria either — Syria was stubborn, had resources, and they didn’t want a confrontation. So they kept trying to sell us solutions that weren’t in Lebanon’s interest.”

“The Americans were always looking for the quickest deal,” he added. “They wanted to please both Syria and Israel. With Syria, it was clear — they didn’t want to upset Assad, because they knew who held the real power in Lebanon.”

Gemayel said that while he personally held the reins in decision-making and negotiations with Syria during his time in office, several close advisers and intermediaries played essential roles in laying the groundwork for dialogue with Damascus.

“The relationship and final decisions were in my hands,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

“I was the one doing the actual negotiating. But when it came to preparation, the late Jean Obeid played a very valuable role. He was intelligent, committed to Lebanon’s interests, and had close ties with the Syrians. He couldn’t get everything done, but he managed to ease certain issues,” said Gemayel.

Gemayel also credited Eli Salem, another aide, for navigating delicate talks with Syrian officials — particularly with Khaddam.

“Salem had a knack for getting through on specific points,” Gemayel said. “He had good chemistry with Khaddam, and that helped, especially since Khaddam and I didn’t get along.”

One figure who unexpectedly played a constructive role, according to Gemayel, was Brigadier General Jamil al-Sayyed, then an intelligence officer stationed in Lebanon’s eastern Bekaa Valley.

“You may be surprised,” he said, “but Jamil al-Sayyed was very helpful. Whenever I was heading to Damascus, I would stop in the Bekaa to meet him. He gave me very precise insights into what was happening at the Syrian presidential palace and the broader picture in Damascus. He was well-informed, sincere, and provided intelligence that wasn’t widely available — information that truly benefited Lebanon.”

Asked whether Syria was uneasy about the role of veteran journalist and diplomat Ghassan Tueni in his administration, Gemayel said the Syrians had little affection for him.

“There was never any warmth toward Ghassan,” he said. “He came with me to Syria just once, and it was clear there was tension. Whenever he was present, things got heated. Ghassan and Khaddam were like a ping-pong match — constantly hitting the ball back and forth.”

The friction, Gemayel explained, stemmed in large part from Tueni’s association with An-Nahar, the Beirut daily he helped lead, which often published sharp criticism of Syria.

“Syria never appreciated An-Nahar,” Gemayel said. “Even if Ghassan tried to distance himself from specific articles, the content was out there for everyone to see — and the Syrians didn’t forget it.”