This study examines the extent to which Syria’s permanent constitution, which came into force in 1973, embodies the notion of a state based on the rule of law.  By analyzing its 1973 text, the author focuses on constitutional references to justice, totality, and equality in citizenship; the “general popular will”; supremacy of the rule of law and the division of powers; and judicial oversight over the executive. Throughout his analysis, Haweja seeks to demonstrate the way in which the new Syrian constitution, drafted in 2012, and also known as the “the Crisis Constitution,” does not represent a meaningful change to that written in 1973. This, despite the fact that it contradicted Article 8 of the 1973 text which placed the leadership of the Arab Socialist Baath Party in the hands of “the people and society”, and in spite of its attempt to rid itself of the nationalist and socialist ideological phrasing embedded in the wording and the preamble to the 1973 Constitution. For Haweja, the success of Syria’s new constitution remains questionable when considering it replicates the previous one, and reflects an authoritarian model in the midst of sharp societal divisions. Haweja stresses that the new text also lacks the fundamentals of a social contract and government vision to which the country can aspire. Syrians’ aspirations are based on the notion that such a social contract, and government action plan, can pave the way to social advancement and human prosperity.