Inside the Ahmad H. Trial #7: Shared Experiences

Hanseatic Higher Regional Court – Hamburg, Germany

Trial Monitoring Summary #7

Hearing Dates: July 16 & 17, 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 7^th trial monitoring report details days 11 and 12 of the trial of Ahmad H. in Hamburg, Germany. A total of three witnesses were heard during these two trial days. Neither of the witnesses knew or had ever seen the Accused but all three shared traumatic experiences of arrest and forced labor at the hands of the NDF. An important fourth witness who was summoned to be heard on day 11, but did not appear and was fined by the Judge for his failure to appear [Section 51 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure]. The Judge also noted that this witness and his testimony would be very important for the trial.

Day 11 – July 16, 2024

Today, freelance journalist Hannah El-Hitami and a communications staff member from the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights [ECCHR] joined the public gallery.

The session started with a two-hour delay since the first witness, [redacted name] P8, did not appear. Thus, the second witness planned for the day, [redacted name] P9, a 73-year-old Syrian man, born in [redacted location], was questioned instead. He said he lived in Tadamon from [redacted information]-2012.

Right from the start, it became clear that the witness did not know the Accused. Similar to the situation on day 9 of the trial [see Trial Report #6] concerning P4, the witness said that he does not know who the Accused was, when asked by the Judge. Instead, Defense Counsel Moschref raised his hand presumably to confuse him since it made it appear as if the Counsel was in fact the Accused. The Judge clarified to P9 who the Accused was and P9 explained that he did not know him or had ever seen him.

The Judge then asked the witness what prompted him to leave Syria. The witness recalled that he was arrested and tortured by both sides, the Opposition and NDF. He testified to having fled Syria before the Tadamon massacre occurred but was held in the location where it happened.

Upon the Judge’s request, P9 then described in detail how he was arrested and the events leading up to the arrest.

According to the witness, he lived on a street located between the Opposition and the Regime, close to a mosque. One day, he remembered, he was walking back from work and saw two men lying on the street. P9 identified them as NDF members. He testified that they had been shot by other NDF members who were with them. The two men lying on the floor were begging P9 to help them, calling him [redacted name]. P9 testified that he was too scared to do anything as the NDF members knew him and where he lived. The other NDF members then fired shots close to P9’s feet in order to intimidate him and to make him run away. On the next day, P9 recounted, the army of the Opposition advanced, and there were explosions and armored fire. [Redacted name] second wife was living down the street from P9. [Redacted name], who knew P9 through P9’s wife, asked the witness to protect and hide his wife. According to P9’s testimony, [redacted name’s] wife told the witness that her house would be safest for hiding as she had cameras installed and all doors and windows were intact. P9, his wife and [redacted name’s] wife stayed in the house for seven days.

The key event which then led to P9’s arrest was the following: The witness looked outside the window and called his children on the phone who were living with P9’s first wife in a different location. According to P9, [redacted name’s] wife thought he was on the phone to someone of the Opposition and called someone from the NDF telling them that P9 wanted to overthrow the regime. The witness was then arrested and brought to a garage where other eleven Palestinians were held. They were unharmed, the witness noted. P9 was then taken to a different location, where he was blindfolded and beaten. When his blindfold fell by accident, he recognized [redacted name], and P9 recounted having said to him: “I protected your wife, why are you beating me?”. After this, the witness punched [redacted name] in the face. This act earned P9 further beatings and being tied up with cable ties.

P9 then explained that he was released the next day only because his wife talked to a respected Sheik, who in turn talked to a man called “[redacted name]”, another NDF leader in a rank above [redacted name]. [Redacted name] ordered P9’s release. Upon this event, the witness fled Syria and only came back to get his children and to flee to Europe. He now lives in [redacted location].

The witness talked a lot, repeated himself often and spoke in a loud and agitated voice. Overall, he seemed emotionalized. After the Judges completed their questions, and the Prosecution did not have any questions; a break was issued before the Defense started their questioning.

***

[60- minutes - break]

***

Upon return from the break, the Defense asked the witness many detailed questions. For instance, what the witness remembered from [redacted name’s] house, details regarding each room in the house and the size of the rooms. There was a very long discussion between the Defense Counsel and the witness regarding his flight route to [redacted location], [redacted location] and the car which he used during his flight. This discussion seemed strenuous for all parties as the witness account was confusing at times. P9 became increasingly agitated, the Defense could not follow the witness account, and the Prosecution grew visibly impatient as well.

This tension culminated in the Defense's question concerning the places in which the witness had not seen the Accused, such as diverse checkpoints. The Prosecution spoke up and asked the Judge to intervene, explaining that it would be sufficient to know that the witness did not know or had seen Ahmed H. before. The Judge agreed with the Prosecution on this matter. The witness himself also intervened and explained that even if one was passing the checkpoints as a normal civilian one was just too scared to look intensively at people standing at the checkpoints, one simply would not dare. At this point, P9 was visibly agitated and said he did not know why he was invited to testify. He had not even known what the trial was about, he added in frustration.

After the Defense had finished the questioning, the Prosecution read out a motion imposing a fine of 300 Euros or three days in arrest for disobedience to court orders [Section 70 (1) of the Procedural Code] for the witness, P8, who had failed to appear in court today. The Judge explained that it was not possible to contact the witness via phone, which meant the witness would need to be contacted via the German Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) or via his relatives in order to be reminded of the importance of his testimony for this trial.

The Judge also read out a decision declining the Defense's motion to validate that P5 was working as a research assistant at the [redacted information] [for more details, see Trial Report 2]. The reasoning behind the decision was related to witness protection, specifically of witness P2, and the fact that her publications were proof enough.

The proceedings were adjourned at 2:30 PM.

The next trial day will be on July 17, 2024, at 9:00 AM.

Day 12 – July 17, 2024

On this trial day, three new witnesses appeared in court. However, the day progressed quickly as neither of the witnesses knew Ahmad H. and even the Defense Counsel did not ask many questions.

The first witness [redacted name] P10, lived in the south of Damascus. When asked by the Judge about his life in Damascus at the time, P10 recounted how the NDF was terrorizing people in the city and how NDF snipers shot passers-by from afar. The witness explained that there were many checkpoints he was trying to avoid as he feared being arrested for being Sunni. He also recounted having been arrested and compelled to undertake forced labor twice. P10 explained that he suffered great psychological stress whenever he tried to remember the events, but that he would try to talk about it nonetheless.

The Judge asked P10 whether he had ever been arrested by the NDF. Upon this, the witness recounted that he had in fact been arrested in a park together with other young men and compelled to fill sacks of sand to build a protective shield from attacks by the Opposition. P10 also testified to having been forced by the NDF to dig a tunnel of 40-50 meters. During the arrest P10’s ID and phone were taken. He worked around 6-8 hours, only receiving water and no food. The witness also received no money for the labor. The witness further recalled that the ID was given back to him when the work was completed, and he was sent home. P10 left Syria in 2015 and now lives in [redacted location].

Overall, the Judges asked the exact same questions to all three witnesses: whether they had been arrested, by whom, what type of work they had to undertake, if they received the chance to buy themselves free of the work, how many hours they had to work, and whether they received food or money for their work. All three witnesses who testified today, P10, P11 and P12, gave very similar answers.

P10 was asked by the Judge whether he knew the Accused, to which he answered “no, not at all”. The Judge then asked the witness whether he had heard the name “Abu Haider Trucks”. P10 confirmed and explained that this nickname stood for someone who drove excavators. Importantly, the witness mentioned that Abu Haider Trucks was known to be a murderer and criminal and that he had a role in "the massacre." It became clear that the witness believed that two massacres were committed at the time: one that involved Amjad Y. and one that involved Abu Haider Trucks. Notably, neither the Judges nor the Prosecution asked more questions about this detail. Only with the Defense's questioning, this was explored further. When the Defense Counsel asked more precisely how the witness had heard about Ahmad H. being called a criminal and a murderer, the Counsel put it this way: "Was it just gossip, or general attributions to discredit the person?" P10 was not able to answer the question and said it was just known that this person was a criminal.

***

[30 - minutes - break]

***

After the break, the next witness was heard, [redacted name] P11, with [redacted information] years, the youngest of all three today. The witness appeared very nervous and was accompanied by a friend, who sat in the gallery. They hugged before the session started. P11 was the only witness thus far who was accompanied by someone to court.

P11 testified in Arabic first, then switched to German as he kept on answering partly in German. The Judge asked him whether he preferred testifying in German, which P11 confirmed. While the witness was not fluent in German, one was still able to understand him.

According to the witness, he lived in At-Tadamon until 2014 opposite a building, where people were giving out flour and sugar. He recounted to have witnessed a woman being raped behind the building and killed afterwards. The witness then recounted how he was taken out of school by his father after a bomb detonated close to the school. After this, he started to work at 13 years old. P11 recounted having been beaten by NDF members who knew where he lived, for being Sunni.

The Judge asked P11 the same set of questions concerning the arrest and undertaking of forced labor. P11’s answers were almost identical to those of P10. When asked by the Judge, the witness also denied knowing Ahmad H. or having seen him before.

The Prosecution asked a single question about the ID document, namely if the witness had received it back after having undertaken the forced labor. The witness confirmed this. For the first time during this trial, the Defense had no questions. The Presiding Judge then dismissed P11 before issuing a break. Outside of the courtroom, the witness was comforted by his friend. He had tears in his eyes and seemed emotionalized.

***

[60 - minutes - break]

***

After the lunch break, the third and last witness was heard: [redacted name] P12, who is a [redacted information]-years old student and currently lives in [redacted location]. Like the other witnesses, P12 lived in Tadamon up until 2015. He testified having left Syria out of fear that he was going to be called in for military service.

P11 was also asked by the Judge whether he had been arrested. P11 explained that he had been arrested by NDF members at checkpoints and compelled to undertake forced labor 3-4 times. During these events, he was brought to the NDF leader [redacted name] 2-3 times. According to P11, [redacted name’s] office was located 100 meters from the checkpoint near the automatic bakery [for more details related to this account, see also Trial Report #6]. [Redacted name] asked the witness to fight for the NDF, but P11 refused since he was the only provider for his family. P11 testified that he was asked to fight because he is Alawite. Again, the Judge asked the same set of questions about the arrest and forced labor and received the same answers as from the other two witnesses. When asked by the Judge whether P11 knew or had ever seen Ahmad H., the witness denied it.

The Prosecution added only one question asking whether P11 had received food while undertaking forced labor, which the witness also denied.

The only question the Defense asked was whether Alawites were “left in peace by the NDF”. To this, the witness responded that if Alawites did not want to fight for the NDF, the Forces “did not leave them alone”. The witness was then dismissed.

Before the session was terminated, Ahmad H. asked the interpreter to tell the Judge that he was very thankful that the Judge had arranged a doctor's appointment for him. The Judge acknowledged this but also said that the doctor’s appointment had already been set anyway.

The proceedings were adjourned at 1:45 PM.

The next session will take place on 23 July 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