Inside the Al-Yarmouk Trial of Jihad et al. #12

TRIAL OF JIHAD A., MAHMOUD A., MAZHAR J., SAMEER S., AND WAEL S.

Higher Regional Court in Koblenz, Germany

The Center for Victims of Torture (CVT) provided support to SJAC to monitor this trial and prepare the first six monitoring reports. CVT has continued the monitoring of this trial from report seven onwards and has edited them according to its own style guidelines.

CAUTION: Some testimony may include graphic descriptions of torture, rape or other violent acts.      

This is an informal summary of the proceedings and not a verbatim transcript. CVT has chosen not to use the names of witnesses or detailed information that could be used to identify them.

Trial Report 12: Summary

On the first trial day this week, the session involved the testimony of witness W11 and his wife, W12, regarding the 2012 crackdown on the demonstration in Al-Yarmouk, detailing the deployment of armed regime forces and the circumstances surrounding their son's death. The defense contested the witnesses' credibility and spatial observations, leading to a postponement of the proceedings for further preparation.

On the second day this week, the session continued testimony of witness W12. The hearing focused on the cross-examination of W12 regarding sniper activity and her son's death, highlighting potential retaliation for a video he had recorded of a regime raid. Although she could not personally identify the accused, the witness provided testimony on the transport of victims and rebuked the accused's conduct.

Trial Day 21: March 25, 2026

At the outset of the session, Presiding Judge Dr. Kerber established the presence of all parties and summoned the witness, W11, to the courtroom. The witness, a mechanical engineer currently working as a commercial driver in Europe, appeared without legal counsel and was duly instructed on his duty to testify truthfully and the criminal penalties for perjury. Regarding his background, the witness testified that he resided in a particular street of the Al-Yarmouk Camp until late 2012.

The witness described the events of a Friday in July 2012, during which he was outdoors with his sons, F47, and F48, around noon. While F47 joined the demonstration at the Palestine roundabout, the witness observed gunfire erupting from several directions shortly thereafter and fled with his younger son, F48, to the parental residence. After searching for several hours in various hospitals, including Al-Basil and Damascus Hospital, the witness learned of his son's death around midnight after he was shown a video by a person he met during his search. He identified the body at the Abdel Mosque and was later directed to the burial site in Yalda.

During further questioning, the witness testified that because of the chaotic situation shots were fired at the Palestine roundabout and near the biscuit factory, while emphasizing that he did not personally see the shooters due to his flight. However, he relayed information from his neighbor, P1, who mentioned specific names of alleged shooters and the involvement of Shabiha forces and security personnel in the front lines. The witness further explained that due to a lack of state support, the wounded were transported exclusively by private vehicles.

The court then continued the examination using maps, whereby the witness marked precise locations and escape routes. He recalled that he did not see armed individuals directly in front of his house but confirmed this in his later statement at a court proceeding in another European city. The defense intensively questioned the consistency of his testimony compared to previous police interviews, particularly regarding the visibility of the crime scene from his apartment.

[68-minute break]

After the lunch break, the examination by the defense counsel resumed, focusing on the relationship with the neighbor, P1, and the perception of the weapons used. The witness explained his knowledge of machine guns through his previous military service. Following the examination, the witness was sworn in and dismissed from the stand, after which some defense counsel issued statements pursuant to Section 257 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (GCCP), partially challenging the witness's credibility while other defense counsel emphasized that this was the first usable or valuable testimony in the trial so far due to his military knowledge and level of detail.

Following a brief interruption, the first witness's wife, W12, was called as a witness. She described hearing shots after Friday prayers and searching for her family at great personal risk. The witness described the presence of armed groups from the Ahmad Jibril movement and the Shabiha at the Palestine roundabout, operating in both uniform and civilian clothing. She clarified that she went back home initially because the heavy firing made it impossible to proceed.

The witness remembered approximately ten victims and the transport of the wounded, including the neighbor's son, F7, via Suzuki pickup trucks. She recalled that shots were deliberately fired from a sharp junction where two streets split into a triangle. Those shots were aimed at the tires of her vehicle while she continued the search with her husband. During the questioning, she was unable to directly identify any of the accused as perpetrators but confirmed the general atmosphere of fear and the massive use of rapid-fire rifles. Upon a motion filed by the defense, the further questioning of witness W12 was adjourned to the following trial day to allow defense counsel time for adequate preparation.

The proceedings were adjourned at 2:50 PM.

The next trial day will be on March 26, 2026, at 9:00 AM.

Trial Day 22: March 26, 2026

The session commenced at 9:24 AM with a twenty-minute delay, drawing sharp criticism from the judges. The delay resulted from a last-minute consultation between defense counsel Mr. Flintrop and his client, the accused Mahmoud A. A heated exchange ensued between the judges and the defense regarding logistics and security protocols for the accused’s appearance. Regarding legal representation, Mr. Schönfelder was appointed as defense counsel for Sameer S., substituting for Mr. Baumgart.

Then the witness from the prior day, W12 was recalled to the stand and reminded of her legal rights and duties. The questioning initially focused on the presence of snipers during and after the demonstration in the Al-Yarmouk camp. The witness clarified that she could not directly see the snipers due to their elevated positions on rooftops; however, she distinctly heard shots fired from above. She described a specific incident where a projectile narrowly missed a protester’s head. Regarding the origins of the demonstration, the witness suggested that a potential trigger for the demonstration was an incident involving a bus filled with young men who were stopped at a checkpoint and potentially murdered. Furthermore, she confirmed having testified alongside her husband before a Swedish court in the proceedings against Mahmoud S. in November of the previous year.

A significant portion of the testimony concerned a video recorded by the witness’s late son two days prior to the demonstration, depicting a raid. The defense explored whether the son’s death might have been a targeted retaliation for this recording. The witness testified that a neighbor had warned the family, as security forces were allegedly able to identify the house based on the camera angle. However, she noted that the neighbor´s son, who was close to the security forces, intervened and spoke on behalf of her son. This intervention initially weakened the assumption that he was killed specifically because of the video, as no immediate arrest followed. Regarding the local topography, the witness clarified her husband’s testimony from the previous day, confirming that the Palestine roundabout was not directly visible from their location due to the curve of the street.

The witness then described the evacuation of the wounded via several civilian pickup trucks and expressed uncertainty regarding the presence of official ambulances. She differentiated between camp-affiliated medical vehicles and those from outside the area. During the proceedings, an emotional moment occurred when the witness rebuked the conduct of one of the accused, claiming that she had seen him laughing despite the gravity of the topic, and appealed to the court for justice. Despite the trauma of losing her son, she emphasized that she could only testify to what she personally witnessed and was unable to directly identify any of the accused present as perpetrators. However, she noted that various videos can be found on the internet in which the accused can allegedly be recognized in such positions. She further mentioned that the responsibility of various groups, such as the Free Palestine Movement, Shabiha, and People’s Committee, was common knowledge.

Towards the end of the questioning, details regarding her son’s burial in Yalda and the family’s political stance toward the Syrian regime in 2012 were discussed. The witness clarified that participating in the demonstration was an expression of their opposition to the regime’s acts of violence. As there were no further questions from the defense and no statements pursuant to Section 257 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure were submitted, the witness was dismissed without being sworn in.

The proceedings were adjourned at 10:33 AM.

The next trial day will be on April 15, 2026, at 10:00 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