Inside the Coastal Incidents Trial – Assad’s Affiliates #8: It Was Merely a Head of an ISIS Member

TRIAL OF THE COASTAL INCIDENTS

Military Criminal Court – Aleppo, Syria 

Trial Monitoring Summary #8 – Assad’s Affiliates 

Hearing Date: July 9, 2026

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

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 continues to provide a summary of the proceedings while redacting certain details to protect witness privacy and to preserve the integrity of the trial.]

[Note: Following the first session of the trial, in which all the Accused — both Assad regime’s and Government’s affiliates — appeared before the Court, the Accused were severed into two groups based on their affiliations. Therefore, the Syria Justice and Accountability Centre (SJAC) decided to separate the trial reports according to the Accused’s affiliations.]

SJAC’s 8th trial monitoring report details day 9 in the trial of Assad’s affiliates pertaining to the coastal incident, taking place in Aleppo, Syria. On this trial day, six Accused appeared before the Court. One of the Accused alleged that he was subjected to abuses in prison. Consequently, the Judge asked him to submit requests regarding this matter. The Prosecutor requested appointing an expert to recover data from the mobile phone of one of the Accused. Another Accused claimed that the person whose head the Accused was carrying was affiliated with ISIS, and that the photo showing him doing so dates back to 2017. Lastly, one Counsel requested that the case of his two clients be severed from the case of a third Accused.

Day 8 – July 9, 2026

The Accused were brought into the courtroom at 11:00AM. Nearly twenty members of Accused’s family were present. The trial commenced at 10:00AM.

The First Case:

The Accused, Hasan H., was called. His ad hoc court-appointed Defense Counsel C2 [redacted name] appeared with him.

The Accused was asked whether he had any other statements, which he and his Counsel denied.

In the context of the session, the Accused Hasan H. informed the Presiding Judge that he is being subjected to abuses in prison. The Presiding Judge clarified to him that this is impermissible, pointing out that the Chief Prosecutor [who is also the Military Court President] was present and listening to what he was stating. The Judge requested the Accused to submit requests regarding this matter, emphasizing that no one is permitted to violate any rights of the Accused. The Accused noted that he had previously requested to see the Chief Prosecutor several times, but his request was not granted.

The Court decided to adjourn the session for review to September 10, 2026.

The Second Case:

The Accused, Mohammad S., was called. Defense Counsel C3 [redacted name] appeared with him.

Expert E1 [redacted name] was called and assigned to complete the expert analysis. E1 requested an extension of time to accomplish the task.

A letter was received from the Public Prosecution requesting approval to unlock the mobile phone of O4 [redacted name] and recover all deleted files and data therefrom through the Expert.

The Court decided to assign the Expert to conduct the expert analysis, and adjourned the session to September 10, 2026.

The Third Case:

The Accused, Tahani S., was called. His ad hoc court-appointed Defense Counsel C3 [redacted name] appeared with him.

The Accused was asked whether he had any other statements, which he and his Counsel denied.

The Court decided to adjourn the session for review to September 10, 2026.

The Fourth Case:

The Accused, Maher O. and Maher A., were called. Defense Counsel C3 [redacted name] appeared with them. The Accused Al-Waddah I. was called. Counsel C2 [redacted name] appeared with him.

Expert E2 [redacted name] was called. The Court requested proof that the video clip was filmed prior to the liberation.

The Accused Al-Waddah I. requested that an audio and video expert analysis be conducted on the clip, particularly a photo showing him carrying a person's head, in order to prove that it dates back to 2017, as it was taken during battles between the "[former] regime" and ISIS.

When the Court asked the Accused Al-Waddah I. whether he still retained the killed person's ID, he answered that he does not remember that, nor whether it is in his house or was lost.

When the Judge asked him why he kept the ISIS member's ID for all this time, the Accused answered that he might have forgotten the ID at his house without noticing it.

The Court decided to conduct an expert analysis on the video clip and the specific photo showing the Accused Al-Waddah I. carrying a head separated from a body, to establish the date of the photo and when the clip was created and published. The Court assigned E2 to execute this task and ordered the party requesting the expert analysis to deposit an amount of 4,000 New Syrian Pounds.

Counsel C2 declared his willingness to deposit the amount.

E2 requested an extension of time to accomplish the task.

C3, Counsel for the Accused Maher O. and Maher A., requested to sever the case concerning his two clients from the case of Al-Waddah I..

The Court decided to grant the Expert an extension of time and adjourned the session to September 10, 2026.

The proceedings were adjourned at 12:00PM.

The next trial day will be on September 10, 2026, at 10AM.

___________________________

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