Inside the Ahmad H. Trial #8: “You better shut your mouth, I am not alone”

Hanseatic Higher Regional Court – Hamburg, Germany

Trial Monitoring Summary #8

Hearing Dates: July 23 & 24, 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 8th trial monitoring report details days 13 and 14 of the trial of Ahmad H. in Hamburg, Germany.  On the first day, a former fellow inmate, P13, of the Accused was questioned. The Judge asked the witness about his relation to Ahmad H. P13 testified against the Accused, revealing details of their prison interactions and Ahmed H.'s alleged crimes in Syria. He presented personal notes and recounted Ahmed H.'s admissions, including threats and attempts to manipulate legal processes.

On the second day, another witness, P14, a former employee who used to work near a checkpoint testified about his experiences with Ahmad H., whom he identified as a violent NDF member. The testimonial described forced labor at NDF checkpoints and thefts Ahmad H. allegedly committed at P14’s shop in Damascus. The Defense Counsel, unprepared for P14's testimony, requested an adjournment because of surprising new information provided by the Accused which was denied. The session concluded with the Defense’s request to reveal the identity of P5’s sources.

Day 13 – July 23, 2024

Today a former inmate, [redacted name], P13 who was imprisoned in the same facility as Ahmad H. testified in court. [Redacted name], P13, a young man in his twenties, seemed calm at first, but throughout the questioning got increasingly excited. It appeared as though P13 was very willing to testify against the Accused. He brought some of his personal notes, which he claimed to have taken during his stay in prison. They concerned conversations he allegedly had with Ahmad H. at the time. The witness was asked by the Judges in which period of time and how exactly the two met. P13 recounted that they met in prison and that the witness felt sorry for him because Ahmed H. was not allowed to go to school or get a job. P13 explained that Ahmad H. asked him for favors from time to time, since P13 had no restrictions in prison. Favors involved, for example, phoning Ahmad H.’s siblings, [redacted name] and [redacted name], or his lawyers. From then on, the Accused started to trust the witness.

Ahmed H. recounted events of the war in Syria to the witness and told P13 how the Accused, together with others, searched deceased bodies lying on the street for valuables. P13 explained that from this moment on he started taking notes about every interaction he had with Ahmed H. The witness wanted to gain evidence against the Accused and hand the notes over to the German Federal Criminal Police Office.

The Judges asked the witness about his police questioning, whether he had been shown any pictures and if he had been able to identify anyone. P13 confirmed that he was shown a picture of the Accused and that he identified him as Ahmad H.

The witness told the Judges that Ahmed H. bragged about how he and his friend would threaten others, and he would state how much power he had. The witness also remembered that Ahmad H. told him that a friend of the Accused (the name was unknown to the witness) advised Ahmed H. to murder his own wife because of their diverging religious beliefs. If he did not do it, Ahmad H. was told by this friend, he would not be able to go back to Syria ever again.

P13 further testified that Ahmad H. revealed to him that there were many more testimonials in the Netherlands and in Belgium, who could incriminate the Accused. Therefore, Ahmad H. begged the witness to call his lawyers for him, so they could get the address of each witness from the police investigation file. The Judges asked P13 whether he knew why Ahmad H. needed the addresses of the other witnesses, but P13 denied.

The Judge also asked the witness if he knew about Ahmad H.'s relation to any sort of drug. P13 explained that Ahmad H. would only be under the influence of Marijuana but would not consume any other drugs.

Lastly, P13 testified about how Ahmad H. always complained about the fact that he would have to stand trial here in Germany because of a crime he had committed in Syria. The Judges wanted to clarify this point and asked the witness if Ahmad H. confessed the crime, namely the stealing of valuables from dead bodies to him, which P13 confirmed. Upon questioning by the Judge, the witness revealed that he does not speak Arabic and would communicate with Ahmad H. in broken German and hand gestures.

Before the session was closed, the Prosecution asked P13 if he knew what happened to Ahmad H.’s phone. The witness explained that Ahmed H. showed him a binder, which, according to the Accused, included protocols of Ahmad H.’s phone but the witness was not allowed to investigate the binder.

The Defense Counsel did not question the witness.

The proceedings were adjourned at 9:54 AM.

The next trial day will be on July 24, 2024, at 9:00 AM.

Day 14 – July 24, 2024

A new witness testified in court today, [redacted name], P14. When asked by the Judge about his profession, P14 explained that he was an employee who was working in a small shop about 200-300 m away from a checkpoint and that he had been a victim of Ahmad H.’s violence and other crimes. At first, P14 talked about his relation to the Accused and how they first met. He claimed that Ahmad H. was a well-known NDF member in their hometown.

Upon the Judge’s request P14 then gave a detailed report about the forced labor he had to undertake. The witness remembered that civilians who went through the checkpoint were stopped by NDF, who then confiscated their ID´s and phones. They had to wait at the checkpoint till the NDF gathered around 20 people. The civilians were then rounded up with another group of civilians, also around 20 people, who walked together to a checkpoint where they had to build a sort of shield by stacking up around 8-9 sandbags. During that forced labor the civilians were not allowed to drink or eat and if they worked too slowly or showed resistance, the NDF would pull them out and beat them. After 7-8 hours of labor the civilians were dropped off at a small shop where they would be given back their IDs and phones.

The Presiding Judge asked the witness why the NDF would force civilians to undertake this kind of work. P14 replied that the NDF feared being shot by the Opposition during the work, so they delegated it to non-NDF members.

After this account, the witness proceeded, testifying about two incidents involving Ahmad H. During the first one, P14 remembered, the Accused entered a shop called [redacted information], where P14 worked. According to the witness, the Accused grabbed items off the shelves, specifically crystalline figures and plates, and left without paying for these items. The Accused then returned and claimed that the items were broken, and he demanded a replacement. The witness added that this kind of behavior was normal in his hometown. The shop owners in Damascus and the NDF had something like an agreement through which these actions must be tolerated by salesmen. P14 explained it as “an additional tax they [salesmen] have to pay."

According to P14, the second incident involving Ahmad H. occurred when the witness had to transport newly arrived merchandise from China to the shop. To get to the shop, the witness had to pass a checkpoint where the NDF examined the imported goods. By mistake, the driver of the car (not P14) honked multiple times. Ahmad H. was not amused by this, pulled the witness out of the car and slapped him about 10 times. These accounts concluded the interactions P14 had with Ahmad H. in Syria.

The witness then proceeded to talk about the time in which he met the Accused again, at a refugee reception facility in [redacted location], Germany. P14 explained that they had met in a refugee center, when the witness had first come to Germany. The witness confronted Ahmad H. with the events in Syria but the Accused denied everything. After some time, P14 recounted how Ahmad H. threatened him by saying: “You know everything, but you better shut your mouth, I am not alone”. The witness recalled that he reported this incident to the management of the refugee reception facility but was not credible to the management, due to the lack of evidence such as videos or photos of the conversation.

The Judges concluded their questioning by asking P14 if he knew any other individuals from the checkpoint, or someone specific, named “[redacted name]”. The witness confirmed that he recognized the name but also claimed that this person did not work at the checkpoint. He then said he was not familiar with other people who had worked at the checkpoint.

The Prosecution then proceeded to question the witness. The Prosecution wanted the witness to elaborate on every incident that took place thus far, i.e. how many items were stolen by the Accused in chronological order.

Then the Prosecution referred to the questioning undertaken by the police and asked the witness if he knew somebody by the name of “[redacted name]”. The witness replied that [redacted name] was the leader of the checkpoint near his shop.

The Prosecution continued the questioning by showing the witness two pictures with the request to identify any person P14 would recognize. P14 did not recognize anyone. The Prosecution concluded its questioning by asking the witness if he had heard the names “[redacted name] “ or “[redacted name]” before. The witness replied that he did not.

***

[10 - minutes - break]

***

After the break the atmosphere got heated in the courtroom. The Defense Counsel Moschref requested to adjourn the proceedings. He claimed that the Defense Team received new information from the Accused relating to witness P14 and that they would not have sufficient time to question the witness today. The Presiding Judge and the Prosecution agreed that it was known ahead of time that P14 would be testifying today. The Judge then rejected the request arguing that an adjournment would not be permitted based on the lack of preparation from the Defense Counsel.

After this discussion, the Defense Team started their questioning of the witness. They mostly asked the credentials of P14 and tried to identify discrepancies. The Defense Counsel also presented the witness with a map of Damascus and asked him to locate the checkpoint and the shop he worked at.

The Defense Counsel was surprised by this witness and requested P14 be invited again for a second questioning. The Judge accepted this, and the witness was dismissed for today.

Before the session was terminated the Defense Counsel Moschref submitted and read out a written motion to reveal the identity of the sources of witness P5.

The proceedings were adjourned at 2:10 PM.

The next trial day will be on August 1, 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