Inside the Majdi N. Trial #11: Testimony of OCLCH Chief Investigator on the Jaysh Al-Islam's Recruitment of Children and Prison System
TRIAL OF MAJDI N.
Court of Assize – Paris, France
Trial Monitoring Summary #11
Hearing Date: May 7, 2025
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 provides a summary of the proceedings while redacting certain details to protect witness privacy and to preserve the integrity of the trial.]
[Note: Rather than publishing the trial reports of the Majdi N. case in chronological order, SJAC has organized them thematically and coherently based on the content of the hearings, making the material more accessible by highlighting key issues and connections across the proceedings.]
SJAC’s 11th trial monitoring report details day 5 (afternoon) of the trial of Majdi N. in Paris, France. On this trial day, the Chief Investigator of the OCLCH (French Central Police Office for Combating Core International Crimes and Hate Crimes) detailed the evidence related to the charges brought against the Accused. The Court focused the questioning on Jaysh Al-Islam's recruitment of children and prison system. Regarding the recruitment of children, the Chief Investigator elaborated on three anonymous testimonies, one of whom was 13 years old when he joined Jaysh Al-Islam. The Chief Investigator also affirmed that another of these anonymous witnesses felt compelled to join Jaysh Al-Islam when he was a minor and registered with Majdi N. She mentioned other audio and video evidence pointing at the recruitment of children but acknowledged there was no means of knowing their exact age or if they had been enrolled by force. Regarding the prison system, the Chief Investigator reported that Majdi N. claimed to not be aware of the existence of prisons administered by Jaysh Al-Islam. However, the Chief Investigator presented evidence pointing to Majdi N.’s awareness of the kidnapping of Razan Zeitouneh by Jaysh Al-Islam. According to the Chief Investigator, the witnesses did not necessarily report torture in Jaysh Al-Islam's prisons, but rather psychological pressure and malnutrition. The Chief Investigator asserted that Majdi N.’s role in Jaysh Al-Islam was not limited to that of a spokesperson.
Day 5 – May 7, 2025
Afternoon Session
Proceedings resumed at the beginning of the afternoon.
The witness was sworn in, and Presiding Judge Lavergne authorized her to check her notes.
Chief Investigator [redacted name] W6 reminded the Court that the first charges brought against Majdi N. in January 2020 concerned acts of torture, enforced disappearances, and war crimes committed between 2012 and 2018.
W6 depicted Liwa Al-Islam as a Salafist group led on the military side by Zahran Alloush and on the religious side by [redacted name] F25. According to her, the group intended to create an Islamic state in Syria (to which Majdi N. reacted by silently shaking his head) and to fight Kurdish forces. She testified that Jaysh Al-Islam operated in a quasi-state manner, based on an administration made up of various departments. She reported that due to disagreements, Majdi N. left the group in 2017.
W6 referenced two Civil Parties, [redacted name] W20 and [redacted name] W22, who were heard during the preliminary investigation and provided incriminating statements against Majdi N. [See Trial Report #26 and Trial Report #28].
She explained how the French police manage to geolocate and arrest Majdi N. She then relayed Majdi N.’s statements during interrogation in custody about his military service, defection, and role as spokesperson in Jaysh Al-Islam between 2013 and 2016 [see Trial Report #9]. She highlighted Majdi N.’s claim that he would have left Jaysh Al-Islam had he witnessed any crimes being committed by the group. According to her, Majdi N. also reported having launched a petition against the recruitment of children and claimed he had no further contact with the group after his resignation.
Regarding videos where Majdi N. appeared in military uniform, W6 shared his statement that the uniform was merely for propaganda purposes. She stressed that he admitted to having held a significant but not decision-making role and that he was not aware of the existence of prisons administered by the group. When questioned about [Jaysh Al-Islam's prison of] Al-Tawba, Majdi N. had said that Zahran Alloush described it to him as a punishment center for those who defied the group. According to Majdi N., prisoners were mainly soldiers, and when civilians were held, they were either criminals or spies.
Concerning the charge of enforced disappearances, W6 reported that no evidence pointed to Majdi N.’s direct involvement. However, she cited a book by [French author] Justine Augier reporting a conversation where the Accused declared that it would be good to convince Razan Zeitouneh that she was abducted by ISIS. W6 further reported a recording of a conversation between Majdi N. and Abu Hamza, F26, where the latter was shocked to learn that Razan Zeitouneh had been kidnapped by Jaysh Al-Islam, to which Majdi N. replied, "You weren’t aware? If you only knew about all the blood crimes and injustices that had happened!" W6 concluded that even if he was not informed from the start, Majdi N. at least learned about the kidnapping afterwards.
W6 referenced witnesses who described their detention under Jaysh Al-Islam, most notably a documentary dated after 2018 on Dutch TV where a woman said she was imprisoned by the group and heard sounds of torture day and night. W6 further reported an audio recording found on Majdi N.’s computer in which Zahran Alloush declared that Jaysh Al-Islam detained 15,000 people of another armed group and mentioned a military parade aiming at recruiting children. On another recording found, Zahran Alloush addressed conditions in the prison of Al-Tawba, emphasizing that prisoners should have access to food, water, and be allowed to sleep.
W6 then referenced a video of Alawi civilians placed in cages and exhibited around Douma to deter airstrikes from the regime [see Trial Report #5] and a video of ISIS members slaughtering Jaysh Al-Islam’s fighters. W6 explained that Jaysh Al-Islam retaliated and filmed a killing of ISIS members they dressed in black, while the Jaysh Al-Islam fighters wore orange jumpsuits [in response to ISIS’s well-known videos of executions where the prisoners were dressed in orange, as a reference to prisoners of Guantanamo Bay]. W6 further mentioned photos found on Majdi N.’s computer of demonstrations against Jaysh Al-Islam in which people were calling for an end to arbitrary arrests, systematic torture, and other abuses.
According to W6, numerous documents provided evidence of child recruitment: a resume where the Accused mentioned his function as a commander of training camps in Northern Syria; the statement by F26 that Majdi N. was responsible for these camps; and videos of children carrying weapons, very young boys in training sessions’ closing ceremonies, and combat footage where teenagers were visible.
Moreover, W6 collected three anonymous statements by [redacted names], respectively F11, F12 and F13. One of them, F13, was 13 years old when he joined a Jaysh Al-Islam training camp following a propaganda campaign in Douma. He explained that he saw Majdi N. during the registration process, as well as at the beginning and end of each training session. He also reported to having seen the Accused during the execution of a man. F12 gave a similar account, stating he joined during a recruitment campaign. Both individuals described typical training sessions, which started early with prayer and ended late with night exercises. They recalled that the training was extremely physically demanding, and many recruits dropped out along the way. At the end of the program, they were given a few days of rest with their families before being sent to the frontlines.
Regarding Majdi N.’s role in the group, W6 asserted it was not limited to that of a spokesperson, as he was mobilized for a wide range of tasks. She stressed that he mentioned in his resume functions such as commander of a training center in northern Syria, organizer of diving courses, member of the Policy Office مكتب السياسي of Jaysh Al-Islam between 2013 and 2017, and supervisor of zones located between [city inaudible] and Raqqa. W6 further mentioned a questionnaire transmitted by [redacted name] F20 [a member of the Afaq Academy, affiliated with the NGO Geneva Call, see Trial Report TR#21], referring to battles Majdi N. had participated in, as well as summary reports of peace talks in Riyadh, a document about the liberation of two Druze prisoners, etc. She added that numerous individuals had contacted Majdi N. to ask if their relatives were detained by Jaysh Al-Islam and that he was a key contact for any demand people had toward the group. W6 asserted that Majdi N. was not solely a spokesperson, but also an advisor of Zahran Alloush.
Shifting to the Toran Center [a research center related to Jaysh Al-Islam where Majdi N. worked during his time in Turkey], W6 reported that, according to Majdi N., it was financed by the Head of the Syrian National Coalition [redacted name] F27. However, W6 rejoined that documents showed the Center was property of Jaysh Al-Islam. She mentioned [redacted name] F65, a Syrian activist who was close to Razan Zeitouneh, F21. F65 met the Accused in Turkey and reported that Majdi N. had declared to not have anything to do with the kidnapping of the “Douma four.”
W6 quoted other statements providing information about Majdi N.’s involvement in Jaysh Al-Islam, particularly pointing to the fact that he created training camps in Northern Syria and was present during a training in Syria on international humanitarian law. Referring to a recording of a conversation between the Accused and a woman registered as “the German” [in his phone], W6 reported that the woman said she would be in Turkey in August 2016, to which Majdi N. replied that he would be in Syria at that time.
W6 reported that Majdi N.’s family had created a twitter account called “Majdi Family” where a photo of the Accused taken after his arrest was shared [the same photo as in Trial Report #10 where Majdi N.’s face was bruised]. [On this account], Jaysh Al-Islam shared a post denying his involvement in the kidnapping of the “Douma four” and threatening the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM). W6 mentioned a recording of a conversation where Majdi N. was heard speaking angrily, after which the sound of blows could be heard, suggesting a man was being beaten.
According to W6, Majdi N. coordinated actions to put pressure on France and on witnesses who did not accept testifying in his favor. W6 reported that the Accused believed the Police put him under pressure [during custody] to extract confessions from him. W6 depicted that while in detention, Majdi N. was demanding and even authoritarian toward his family, and that they started to grow tired of his requests.
W6 summarized that 160,000 images, 33,000 audio files, and 2,300 conversations were found on Majdi N.’s digital devices seized during his arrest. Majdi N. also had 2,000 contacts saved on his phone. W6 pointed out that none of the data retrieved from Majdi N.'s digital devices dated back earlier than 2015.
Questioned by Presiding Judge Lavergne, W6 explained that Majdi N.’s conversations on Telegram could not be retrieved because the Defense submitted the request too late. Regarding his presence in Syria, she confirmed that the first evidence determining Majdi N.’s location dates back to 2015 [meaning there was no evidence of his location between 2013 and 2015].
Shifting to Majdi N.’s military competencies, W6 believed he knew how to use weapons but indicated that no videos showed his participation in combat. To illustrate his level of knowledge of the group’s activities, W6 asserted that the fact that he met Western Ambassadors proved that he was well informed. Regarding training camps, W6 stressed that conversations showed that Majdi N. was contacted by people who told him how the training sessions went. Presiding Judge Lavergne added that several individuals who shared information with the Court about those training sessions mentioned camps in Douma, and not in northern Syria, which W6 confirmed.
Questioning of W6 on Children’s Recruitment
Presiding Judge Lavergne asked if any instructions to not recruit minors were found in the evidence, which W6 denied. She then mentioned an audio recording found on Majdi N.’s iPhone dated May 15, 2016 where an individual said that from now on, any young person who wanted to enlist had to provide proof of identity.
Civil Parties’ Counsel Bailly requested a video related to the battle named “God is victorious” [الله غالب] that took place in Damascus in 2015 to be displayed in court. Counsel Bailly highlighted that in the video, young children were seen sewing [allegedly military equipment], training, or praying. Presiding Judge Lavergne and Counsel Bailly then referenced two other audio files found on Majdi N.’s computer, where a prison for women was mentioned in a conversation with [redacted name] and a person was heard saying that the situation in the camps has improved and that the young recruits were excellent. Replying to Presiding Judge Lavergne, Majdi N. said he did not remember the files. Counsel Bailly mentioned Majdi N.’s conversation dated October 26, 2015 addressed to [redacted name] to create a new military camp if Jaysh Al-Islam ousts the Accused. The Court interpreter pointed to an ambiguity in the translation, explaining that Majdi N.’s word could mean that he was going to create a camp or to train in a camp. Moreover, the interpreter added that the Arabic term for camp [معسكر] could be as a summer camp, and not a military camp.
Counsel Bailly then turned to the statements of witnesses F11, F12, and F13, which the Defense contested entirely. W6 confirmed that each of these witnesses presented an ID before being interviewed as part of the investigation and added that F11 was the father of F12, and F13 a cousin. W6 affirmed that F12 felt compelled to join Jaysh Al-Islam [when he was a minor], and he had registered with Majdi N. W6 stressed that F12 gave precise and consistent descriptions of the camps and, when asked by Prosecutor Havard at a later point of the questioning, W6 emphasized that their testimonies seemed reliable to her.
According to W6, F11 explained that Majdi N. had threatened to shoot him because he refused to give money [to Jaysh Al-Islam]. F11 had reported that Majdi N. used to preach in mosques to recruit minors. Even though F11, F12, and F13 were heard for informational purposes [and not as formal witnesses], W6 said she had no reason to doubt the veracity of their statements.
Counsel Bailly mentioned the Defense’s request to hear 18 witnesses, which was dismissed by the Investigative Judge. He explained that the refusal was justified by the lack of judicial cooperation with the countries where they were located, and by the fact that their statements related only to Majdi N.’s personality and not directly the crimes in question. At a later point, Defense Counsel Kempf emphasized that these statements had been submitted by [redacted name] F5, the nephew of Majdi N., and had provided detail on the substance of the case. [The videos of four of these testimonies were displayed in Court in a later session, see Trial Report #30].
Civil Parties’ Counsel Baudouin referenced an audio recording of Zahran Alloush conversing with leaders of Jaysh Al-Islam about the need to recruit young men.
Prosecutor Havard questioned W6 about the video previously displayed. In one scene, W6 believed that trainers were showing minors how to use arms. She also mentioned a young fighter throwing a grenade, and another carrying a weapon.
Prosecutor Havard then mentioned a video by Jaysh Al-Islam on “jihadist trainings” [دورة الاعداد الجهادي] called “Lions of Justice” [أسود الحق]. W6 highlighted that a person appearing in the video was very young. Defense Counsel Ruiz emphasized that the video’s title had been translated as “Lion Cubs of Justice” [during the investigation], and made clear that it was instead “Lions.” Responding to Counsel Ruiz at a later stage in the questioning, W6 affirmed that many witnesses explained that the term “Lion Cubs” was used when referring to training camps.
Questioned by Defense Counsel Ruiz about Majdi N.’s mention of training camp responsibilities in his resume, W6 confirmed that there was no indication the camps specifically targeted minors. However, she reiterated that minors were visible [on video, etc.]. She also acknowledged that it was not possible to determine their exact age—whether below or above 15. Responding to Counsel Ruiz, she added that there was also no means of knowing if those on video had been enrolled by force.
Counsel Ruiz emphasized that witnesses F11, F12, and F13 were all from the same family and asked if that impacted the reliability of their statements, which W6 denied. Shifting to propaganda campaigns, W6 denied having found any instruction by the faction’s leadership to target minors.
Responding to Defense Counsel Kempf, W6 doubted any evidence on Majdi. N’s location in 2015 was available, adding that he met Thomas Pierret in Turkey that same year. Counsel Kempf stressed the discrepancies between the statements of Mr. Pierret, [redacted name] W13, and anonymous witness F11 [regarding Majdi N.’s location in 2015]. W6 said that to verify this point, a Judge should have asked Majdi N. and regretted that the investigators’ means of action were limited, as they could not go to Syria. She added that F11 could have gotten the year [when he saw Majdi N. in Eastern Ghouta] wrong. Counsel Kempf mentioned a training in communication management which, to him, confirmed that Majdi N. was in Malatya, Turkey in April 2014, which W6 was not informed about. Counsel Kempf further referred to discrepancies in testimonies regarding the location of Majdi N., and W6 claimed that they did not contradict each other.
Counsel Kempf stressed that a witness referred to Islam Alloush with the name of “Mickael” and asked why he would call him this way. [W6’s response was unclear to the trial monitor.] Counsel Kempf then asked the Court to display a picture he took of a young man in Syria in early 2025 and asked W6 to determine his age. Civil Parties’ Counsel Baudouin objected to this method, and an incident followed. Presiding Judge Lavergne also criticized this method but eventually authorized the Defense to proceed with questioning the witness on the photo.
[25-minute break]
Questioning of W6 on Jaysh Al-Islam’s Detention System
Responding to Presiding Judge Lavergne, W6 mentioned the three famous prisons of Jaysh Al-Islam: Al-Batoon; Al-Tawba; and Al-Kahf. She indicated that W20 was met with a refusal when he requested to visit these prisons. According to W6, the witnesses she heard did not necessarily speak of torture, but rather of pressure and malnutrition, and repeated that Majdi N. denied the existence of prisons, considering Al-Tawba as rather a rehabilitation center. She confirmed that [redacted name] F28, and [redacted name] F29, were leaders of Jaysh Al-Islam.
Questioned about the battle of Adra, W6 indicated that [Jaysh Al-Islam] managed to liberate women detained inside the town's prison. Presiding Judge Lavergne added that according to reports, individuals were summarily executed during the battle, notably due to their Alawi origin; some people were detained, while others were treated as spoils of war. He added that attackers managed to only reach the women’s wing, but the prison of Adra remained under the control of Bashar Al-Assad.
Concerning the prison of Al-Kahf, W6 declared to have little information about it, but stressed that several former detainees could testify. She confirmed that the execution of prisoners was sometimes exhibited for propaganda and mentioned an audio file indicating that Jaysh Al-Islam detained 1,750 members of Jaysh Al-Umma.
Regarding the Toran Center, W6 remembered a document indicating that it belonged to Jaysh Al-Islam. She then mentioned minutes of meetings between [Majdi N.] and Ambassadors, Turkish Intelligence Services, journalists, etc., adding that he was sometimes requested to represent the group at conferences and negotiations. She remarked that Majdi N. intervened for the release of Druze detainees and the exchange of prisoners with the Syrian regime.
Responding to Presiding Judge Lavergne, W6 confirmed that evidence proved Majdi N. occasionally alluded to the possibility that actions of Jaysh Al-Islam might be perceived as war crimes, and that they should be presented differently. She indicated that after his resignation from Jaysh Al-Islam, he was still in contact with some members of the group.
Shifting to financial issues, W6 recalled that Jaysh Al-Islam stored food, which was distributed with priority to soldiers and, for the rest, sold at a quite high price to the population. She also mentioned tensions with other factions over the control of tunnels to transport supplies, as some tunnels generated more revenue than others.
Civil Parties’ Counsel Bailly inquired about torture or abuses suffered by Jaysh Al-Islam’s prisoners. W6 recalled a witness from Liwa Al-Islam who reported having been beaten and hung by his feet. In the Dutch documentary [see above], a woman claimed she had been deprived of food for ten days. W6 concluded that psychological pressure seemed more commonly reported than physical violence.
Counsel Bailly then referenced a video provided by witness [redacted name] W12, where a former member of Jaysh Al-Islam claimed to have worked as a jailer in prison 33, prison 11, the prison of [name unclear] in Douma, and then prison Al-Kahf [most likely [redacted name] F44, see Trial Report #16]. He had described the latter, indicating the prison had three floors, the first one for “identified prisoners” [معروف] and another one for “non-identified prisoners.” The building was divided into two parts; the first part served as a prison and the second part hosted the office of Commander [redacted name] F29. Upstairs, a man called [redacted name] was in charge, while among those responsible for the basement, one was [redacted name]. [This video is mentioned extensively in Trial Report #16].
Civil Parties’ Counsel Zarka referenced the recording of Zahran Alloush where, based on his experience in Branch Palestine, he explained his vision for prison Al-Tawba [see above]. Questioned by Counsel Zarka, W6 confirmed it was surprising that Majdi N. had not been tortured in Branch Palestine. Counsel Zarka then mentioned a conversation found on Majdi N.’s phone where he talked about a man detained by Jaysh Al-Islam but explained that this prisoner was under the supervisory authority of faction Failaq Al-Rahman [فيلق الرحمن]. Counsel Zarka asked W6 if she recalled other cases of prisoners being held in a certain prison, but remaining under the authority of another group, adding that this practice could be seen as a way to build trust between factions. W6 replied that he couldn’t say whether it was common practice.
Counsel Zarka inquired about [redacted name] F7, the [redacted information] of Zahran Alloush, and his supposed violent and problematic attitude in Jaysh Al-Islam. W6 confirmed, adding he was rather feared by members and leaders of Jaysh Al-Islam.
Regarding Majdi N.’s defection from Jaysh Al-Islam, Counsel Zarka mentioned a conversation with F7 found on the Accused’s digital devices, where the two discussed the possibility of continuing to work together privately, outside Jaysh Al-Islam’s framework. W6 recalled Majdi N. indeed offered his services to F7 and had added that he did not get along with other members of Jaysh Al-Islam.
Counsel Zarka indicated that Majdi N. gave himself several nicknames: Abu Sayf; Abu Said; and Abu Mustafa. She asked the witness to explain these prefixes used before names, stressing they carried historical meaning among jihadist fighters. W6 responded that all factions’ members used the prefixes “Abu.” When asked by Presiding Judge Lavergne, Majdi N. denied having been called Abu Sayf.
Prosecutor Havard recapitulated the number of witnesses heard during the investigation: five individuals and one context witness were heard by the Investigative Judge; 18 eyewitnesses were heard either by the Investigative Judge or the investigators; another 34 statements were provided by witnesses, particularly W12; 18 testimonies were provided by the Defense; and an interview was provided by the Commission of Inquiry on Syria. In total, that represented around 60 testimonies. Concerning the Defense’s request to hear [redacted name], the head of opposition media who Majdi N. met in 2013, Prosecutor Havard replied that he did not wish to testify, which W6 confirmed. W6 also depicted the difficulties they had in contacting [redacted name] F14, and a man called [redacted name].
Referring to the conversations on Telegram that could not be added to the proceedings, Prosecutor Havard indicated that the investigators saved the data but received no request for further investigation. Regarding investigations on flights in order to determine Majdi N.’s location, W6 informed the Court about the requests they sent to Turkish Airlines and the tickets they found on Majdi N.’s iPad.
Prosecutor Havard requested the projection of a video dated March 18, 2013 showing a military parade in the Ghouta with [redacted name] F8, Head of General Staff of Jaysh Al-Islam. According to Majdi N., the event was a graduation ceremony for military training programs. Questioned by Prosecutor Havard, the Accused mentioned other individuals appearing in the video: [redacted name], [redacted name], [redacted name], and [redacted name], who was the cousin of W13.
Prosecutor Havard asked if investigators usually had contact with Civil Parties, which W6 denied, stressing that in this case, there was an exception, explaining that she contacted Counsel Bectarte [Civil Parties’ Counsel to the case but who was not present during the trial] to organize the hearing of two anonymous witnesses.
Shifting to the OCLCH’s interrogation of Majdi N. in custody, Prosecutor Havard quoted several exchanges where, to her, the Accused tried to control the flow of the discussion. W6 replied that her colleagues reported he indeed wanted to steer the discussion and the investigators regularly explained to him that they were the ones conducting the interrogation.
Prosecutor Havard referenced a text published by Jaysh Al-Islam where the group explained its opposition to ISIS and declared that all Khawariji [refers to an Islamic sect. The term might be used pejoratively, notably by Islamist factions] will meet death. Prosecutor Havard then mentioned two audio files where Majdi N. was heard saying that ISIS members had been beheaded.
Prosecutor Havard asked why the French prison administration intercepted Majdi N.’s phone calls. W6 explained that after the creation of the family twitter account [see above], a speech by Majdi N. was recorded from detention. In addition, Majdi N. had also told his brother that a demonstration should be organized before the French Ambassy, or a campaign launched to demand his release. Prosecutor Havard then mentioned a conversation with F5, where Majdi N. expressed his wish that witnesses who refused to testify be stigmatized.
Defense Counsel Ruiz asked how many airstrikes and massacres were committed by the Assad regime on Ghouta, which W6 could not determine precisely, but stressed that there were many.
Proceedings were suspended at 8:41 PM.
___________________________
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