A/HRC/43/57 denouncements through reports by other members of the community. Interviewees reported that denouncements were often used to settle unsubstantiated and unrelated interpersonal grievances. In July, a man fled abroad from a town in Dar‘a Governorate following a request to go to the Military Intelligence Directorate, after he received information that a “security report” had been made that accused him of storing medicine for armed groups. 71. Notwithstanding the ongoing arrests and detentions by government forces, in addition to the scores of individuals already deprived of their liberty, a number of “amnesties” were issued in the reporting period by the Government. 36 However, releases mostly took place in Dar‘a Governorate and amounted to few hundred people who had been held for relatively minor offences. 72. The plethora of actors involved, combined with competing approaches to “reconciliation” in certain areas, such as eastern Ghutah, Qunaytirah or Dar‘a, contributed to a fragile security situation. The commitments made when government forces imposed a “reconciliation” process on previously besieged areas, including fulfilling promises of releasing those that had been arrested and detained, recognizing educational certificates and reinstating teachers, remained largely unfulfilled. Civilians in retaken areas indicated that the lack of respect for the “reconciliation” processes and agreements was a significant factor of current fear and tension among the population. 73. A network of checkpoints remained across “reconciled areas”, including in Dar‘a37 and eastern Ghutah, 38 in contravention of the assurances made during “reconciliation processes”. This has severely restricted the freedom of movement of the civilian population, primarily affecting adult men who feared apprehension and forced conscription. Recently, the use of rapidly deployed ad hoc checkpoints in Duma, has instilled additional fear among the population. 74. The ubiquitous checkpoints have further enabled members of the security services to extort residents. One interviewee told the Commission that “even if you are not wanted, you are at risk of being taken at checkpoints. If you need to move, you always need to consider taking some money with you to bribe officials.” These restrictions impeded civilians’ access to basic services, including health care and education, and confined those lacking financial resources to their homes. In Duma City, authorizations are required in order to enter and exit. Without such authorizations, residents reported having to pay large bribes at checkpoints to gain access to hospitals to treat their medical conditions. 75. The right to adequate housing and shelter continued to be widely violated in the Syrian Arab Republic. A lack of clear procedures regarding reclaiming property, and a complex system of overlapping system of laws, created significant barriers to return. Housing land and property frameworks were used to punish individuals broadly perceived to be associated with opposition groups, including activists, who documented violations by government forces.39 76. Interviewees outlined the cumbersome administrative burden upon those wishing to return to their places of origin. Individuals wishing to claim their property in Bayadah, Homs Governorate, were required to present proof of ownership to the Office of the Governorate and then approach the Criminal Security Branch to clear their records. Once cleared, they were required go to the local police. Many people who applied to return were not cleared and the reasons for denial were not specified nor provided in writing, preventing them from challenging the decision. 77. The payment of utility charges further complicated return. In eastern Ghutah, Hulah, Rif Homs and Homs City, those wishing to return to their houses were required to pay utility charges for the entire period of the conflict, including times during which the services were 36 37 38 39 14 For example, Decree No. 20 of 15 September 2019. Interviewees informed the Commission that the north-west of Dar’a was under the control of State security, the north under the control of political security. Interviewees informed the commission that Duma was under the control of State security, Misraba and Harasta under the control of the Fourth Division of the Syrian Arab Army, and Irbin, Bayt Siwa, Hammurah and Kafr Batna controlled by Military Security. A/HRC/40/70, paras. 80–82.