Inside the Ahmad H. Trial #4: The Expert – When Pieces Form a Picture
Hanseatic Higher Regional Court – Hamburg, Germany
Trial Monitoring Summary #4
Hearing Dates: June 10 & 11, 2024
CAUTION: Some testimony includes descriptions of torture.
Note that this summary is not a verbatim transcript of the trial; it is merely an unofficial summary of the proceedings.
Throughout this summary, [information located in brackets are notes from our trial monitor] and “information placed in quotes are statements made by the witness, judges or counsel.” The names and identifying information of witnesses have been redacted.
[Note: SJAC provides a summary of the proceedings while redacting certain details to protect witness privacy and to preserve the integrity of the trial.]
SJAC’s 4th trial monitoring report details days 6 and 7 of the trial of Ahmad H. in Hamburg, Germany. On both days, an expert witness and scholar for Islamic studies, Dr. Steinberg, testified in court by providing detailed information on the Syrian conflict. On the first day, the witness presented several chapters of his expert report with a focus on the fundamental root issues of the conflict and the difference between diverse parties involved on both sides of the conflict.
On the second day, the questioning continued. The Defense Counsel confronted the expert with statements made by witness P2 in court, the week prior. No major discrepancies could be detected. The Defense also questioned Dr. Steinberg’s reliance on opposition-friendly sources for his expert report.
Day 6 – June 10, 2024
Expert witness and Islamic studies scholar Dr. Guido Steinberg was summoned to testify in court.
The Judges asked Dr. Steinberg to present the different chapters of his appraisal report. He talked about how the conflict in Syria developed over time, with specific reference to the situation in Damascus and Tadamon between 2011-2018. Dr. Steinberg explained how the conflict was a) a conflict between Alawites and Sunnis and b) a conflict between Syria’s urban and rural populations, irrespective of their religious affiliation. His account aimed to put the witness accounts into context and confirmed certain aspects of their testimonies.
An important element of Dr. Steinberg’s report was the differentiation he made between the varied parties to the conflict and especially the difference between National Defense Forces (NDF) and the Syrian Army, as well as the Local Defense Forces (LDF) and the role of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in leading Syrian militias. He emphasized that the National Syrian Army was highly understaffed and that the NDF, constituted by voluntary and regime-loyal civilians, was established to counteract this weakness. Upon request by the Judge, Dr. Steinberg could not specify the exact time when the NDF was established as he explained that there is no precise documentation regarding this fact. He clarified however, that by 2018, the NDF was completely incorporated into the Syrian Army. Despite working “for the same team”, Dr. Steinberg then explained how there were sources pointing to the fact that Syrian Army officials judged actions by the NDF, which involved plundering of houses, rape, mass executions, torture and forced labor. Dr. Steinberg emphasized that there was in fact conflict between the pro-regime parties.
Furthermore, Dr. Steinberg explained how NDF leaders were members of the Secret Service Branches 227 and 235. Especially the latter branch is known as the most feared due to its brutality, according to the expert. In addition, Dr. Steinberg described how the NDF was called “Shabiha” not only to describe a militia but it was also used by civilians as a swear word, meaning “ghost militia”. While there are no official numbers on the total count of NDF members, Dr. Steinberg explained how approximately 1,800 NDF members had been convicted criminals.
When asked by the Judge to name specific names of NDF leaders, Dr. Steinberg mentioned [redacted name], who was known for the murder of an unknown but very large number civilians and the rape of many women as well as men. The expert also named [redacted name], who was said to have murdered 15,000 civilians and last but not least [redacted name].
***
[10 - minutes - break]
***
During his testimony, the expert pointed out that atrocities were committed by parties on both sides of the conflict. However, he emphasized that atrocities committed against civilians by the NDF were documented properly and more thoroughly than those committed by the Opposition. For example, he mentioned, through the 27 videos that were part of this trial. Dr. Steinberg explained that on these videos one could see a total of 288 people being or having been murdered.
The expert described how these videos only depicted a snapshot of what happened in Syria within the period of 2011-2018. Members of the Opposition were picked up and handed over to the Secret Services Branches 227 and 235, which were known to have been responsible for a particularly high number of fatalities. However, people murdered by the Secret Service Branch also involved uninvolved civilians, famous people, people who “had witnessed something.” The lists of these people were handed over to militia members at the various checkpoints. The expert further explained that people arrested at these checkpoints were then taken to seized shops that were turned into detention centers. Kidnapped individuals were tortured there, burned, electroshocked, they suffered sexual violence by the hands of Secret Service Branch members. The expert explained that especially [redacted name] was mentioned with regard to this sexual violence, as well as Amjad Y. The expert also explained that by means of bribes one was able to avoid forced labor, torture or violence in some cases.
Dr. Steinberg further described how the Tadamon massacre on April 16, 2013 is the best documented crime allegedly committed by the regime forces. When the videos related to the massacre were made public, Dr. Steinberg said, the media spoke of “ethnic cleansing”, as the victims appeared to have been Arab/Turkmen Sunnis. The victims were burned in the East of Tadamon. The expert pointed out that Amjad Y. was identified as the person primarily responsible regarding the atrocities committed in the videos.
The Judge then asked the expert to look at a photograph of Amjad Y. and describe what Y.’s uniform revealed about his standing or title within the NDF. Dr. Steinberg explained that from the uniform he was wearing in the videos or the photos the expert witness was shown by the Judge, it was unclear what specific title Y. had. The only assumption the expert made during this research was that Amjad Y. worked for Branch 227 of the Secret Service.
***
[60 - minutes - break]
***
After the break the expert was asked to speak a bit more about the NDF and who controlled this militia. Dr. Steinberg explained that the NDF was under the command of the air force and military, which were officially part of the Secret Service. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard provided commanders for the NDF as they wanted to control Syria by building up their own militia inside the Syrian army. However, Dr. Steinberg made it clear that there are big information gaps regarding the organization and structure of the NDF as they were established in secret. In fact, the Assad regime wanted to keep their military structures concealed from the American troops, the expert explained.
The Judges then wanted to know whether the expert believed that the Syrian state also profited from the looting of houses or extortion of people by the NDF. Dr. Steinberg did not confirm or deny this. Instead, he explained that what becomes clear from his research is that criminal acts committed at several checkpoints in Tadamon were carried out by NDF members as they were controlling the situation “on the ground.”
The Prosecution only asked the expert when he would pinpoint the end of the armed conflict in Syria. Dr. Steinberg clarified that the conflict has not ended yet. He described the conflict between regime and opposition fractions as “frozen.”
Before the session was closed by the Judge, the Defense Counsel filed their motion to obtain a translated transcript of the four interviews, which the witness, P5, had undertaken with Amjad Y. as part of her research. The Counsel explained that based on these transcripts they would be able to decide whether the content would need to be introduced to the trial. When asked by the Judge about their stance on the Defense’s motion, the Prosecution stated they did not have any questions regarding those videos and that they rather deemed it necessary to hear another expert witness concerning the “Caesar Files”, which mention Branch 227.
The proceedings were adjourned at 3:45 PM.
The next trial day will be on June 11, 2024, at 9:00 AM.
Day 7 – June 11, 2024
On the second day of this week’s trial session, the questioning of Dr. Steinberg continued. The Defense Counsel took over the questioning and asked the witness a few questions regarding the use of specific terminology in his expert report, such as “regime”. The expert explained that he was not speaking of “government” due to the fact that Syria was an autocratic regime by definition.
The Defense then announced that they wanted to ask Dr. Steinberg specific questions with the help of an interactive map of Tadamon and Damascus. In order to set up the interactive map, a short break was issued.
***
[10 - minutes - break]
***
Upon return, the Defense asked Dr. Steinberg to point out specific locations on the map [note: The trial monitor was unable to see the map because it was not transmitted to the public gallery via a screen]. It involved Tadamon district, Damascus, the frontline, occupied territories by the regime and checkpoints. The expert was not certain where the frontline ran but was able to pinpoint all other locations. The Defense had previously asked the first witness, P5, the same questions on the second day of trial [see for the details, TR# 2]. Hence, this strategy appeared as a fact checking method. The testimonies given by both expert witnesses, Dr. Steinberg and P5 matched.
The expert was then asked whether he recognized any of the names presented by the Defense, including: “[redacted name]”; “[redacted name]” and “[redacted name]” (in connection with Branch 227). Dr. Steinberg did not recognize any of them.
After this process was completed, the Defense confronted Dr. Steinberg with several testimonies made by witness P2 in court last week. The Defense Counsel asked the expert whether he believed these testimonies to be accurate and whether this knowledge presented by P2 would be “normal” for a civilian to have. The testimonies specifically concerned the NDF and Branch 227 of the Secret Service. For the most part, Dr. Steinberg explained that this type of knowledge such as the name of Branch “227”, the rank of a person based on their badge, locations of specific detention centers could be generally known, especially for people living in Tadamon. The Defense also asked the expert whether he had knowledge on whether the NDF protected certain individuals (e.g. people refusing military service), but the expert replied that he did not have information about this.
He was also asked by the Defense whether it would be possible that Amjad Y. would give an external “random” civilian a laptop to repair, referring to the witness P2. [Note: As TR# 03details, P2 was working for the LDF and was responsible for writing salary lists and repairing computers, laptops and phones.]. The expert explained that that would in fact be “unprofessional” behavior.
The Defense then showed the expert photos of Amjad Y. and others including, [redacted name] and “[redacted name]” wearing their respective uniforms and asked Dr. Steinberg how one could tell that Amjad Y. was really working for Branch 227 and not for the NDF. The expert explained that Y. together with [redacted name] were the only people wearing proper military uniforms and that everyone else in the photos was actually wearing “some type of military uniform” but not an official one.
Lastly, the Defense questioned the expert on his methodology for his appraisal report and on his different sources. Dr. Steinberg stated that he undertook an analysis of media and literature sources in Arabic, English, French and some in Spanish.
The Defense Counsel confronted him with the fact that much of the basis of his report related to Tadamon and Amjad Y. was based on the research undertaken by P5 and an activist source called the Action Group for Palestinians of Syria. Dr. Steinberg admitted that there was very little information regarding Tadamon beyond those sources, but he also explained that research by Action Group for Palestinians of Syria discussed crimes committed on both sides of the conflict. He added that the findings of P5’s research were corroborated by the videos that were published in the media and by sources from The Guardian newspaper.
Before the session ended, the Judge told the Defense that their motion from yesterday, concerning four videos for which they requested a full transcript and translation, referred to the same video that was copied three times. The Defense stated that they had not realized this as they did not watch the other three videos and clarified that in this case only one video transcript and translation would be enough.
The proceedings were adjourned at 11:45 AM.
The next trial day will be on June 24, 2024, at 9:00 AM.
___________________________
For more information or to provide feedback, please contact SJAC at [email protected] and follow us on Facebook and Twitter. Subscribe to SJAC’s newsletter for updates on our work