Inside the Mohammed A. and Asmael K. Trial #10: Dirty Deals

Higher Regional Court – Düsseldorf, Germany

Trial Monitoring Report #10 

Hearing Date: August 28 & 29, 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.  

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.]

SJAC’s 10^th trial monitoring report details days 18 and 19 of the trial of Mohammad A. and Asmael K., in Dusseldorf, Germany. Two witnesses from the same area, where the Accused were active, were questioned and gave their testimony about important events related to the case.

On the first trial day, P8 gave her testimony. She explained that she was from the same clan as the two Accused, how well she knew them, and told the story of ISIS killing her husband after kidnapping him with other individuals. On the second trial day, P9 provided testimony and mentioned what he knew about the leaders of ISIS in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad, in addition to recounting the details of the kidnapping of his brother by ISIS and not knowing that ISIS killed him until a long time later. 

Day 18 – August 28, 2024

On this trial day, the Court questioned the witness P8 [redacted name], a [redacted information] Syrian woman, who was born and lived in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad area [Rural Damascus] until she left in 2013.

The witness said that what connects her with the Accused Mohammad A. and Asmael K. is that they are from the same clan. She did not know more about them than the general knowledge of the locals due to rumors and social events.

Upon questioning, the witness also talked about having been born and living in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad town الحجر الأسود, how the regime bombed, besieged the area and did not allow food supplies to enter. She also recalled how “she and her family” risked leaving because there was no other choice but to starve to death. Eventually, they crossed the regime checkpoints first left for [redacted location], and then [redacted location]. She pointed out that her departure from the town coincided with the formation and rise of ISIS there.

The Judge asked her about her husband [redacted name] and his involvement and activities in the revolution. In her response, she talked about the fact that he took up arms, like all men in town, to defend themselves and their areas against the regime. She added that her husband, his brother, [redacted name], and some of their cousins formed a battalion affiliated with the Al-Fatiheen Brigade لواء الفاتحين.

In response to the Judge's question about how ISIS emerged in the area, she explained that a number of those who were affiliated with the Free Syrian Army later became affiliated with ISIS, and later, clashes between the Free Syrian Army and ISIS took place. Furthermore, she recounted how ISIS killed her husband, who went to ISIS to resolve an issue related to a friend. A “dispute over some weapons”, according to the witness. – She remembered that he went along with his cousin [redacted name] and a third person called [redacted name] whose issue needed to be resolved.

The Judge read out the statements the witness gave during the police questioning, part of which aligned with her testimony today, and asked for clarification on other parts pertaining to minor discrepancies.

After that, the Judge asked the witness about the names of people in the area [Al-Hajar Al-Aswad], such as [redacted name], and whether she had heard of them before. She replied that she had heard of him and added later that an ISIS member who had been arrested claimed that [redacted name] executed her husband, [redacted name] and [redacted name] in his farm in Yalda يلدا and buried the three of them as well as their car.

In response to the Judge's question about her knowledge of the two Accused, Mohammad A. and Asmael K., she said that she had not seen anything but had later heard rumors about them joining ISIS circulating among people [in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad].

Upon questioning the fate of her husband's brother, [redacted name], she said that ISIS raided the headquarters of his battalion and arrested him along with several clan members. She denied the involvement of Mohammad A. and Asmael K. in the incident, adding that Asmael K. protected one of his clan members [her husband’s maternal uncle] from ISIS when they wanted to arrest him and hid him in his house.

The second Judge only asked a few questions related to the details mentioned earlier. After that, the Prosecutor was interested in the ISIS trial of her husband and his cousin and also questioned her about [redacted name]. She replied that he was one of her relatives and that he had been detained by ISIS before her husband was detained. According to the witness, he [redacted name] was “falsely accused of communicating with the regime, then tried and executed along with her husband in Yalda town.

***

[15-minutes-break]

***

After the end of the break, which was requested by the Defense Counsel, he asked the witness about how she got out of Al-Hajar Al-Aswad town, and about a specific discrepancy. From the Counsel’s point of view, her testimony about her escape from the regime but then going to the regime’s checkpoints instead of looking for alternatives was not coherent. She replied by emphasizing that she had no other choice.

The Defense Counsel asked again about the details of how she left Al-Hajar Al-Aswad town and expressed his surprise because she resorted to the regime's checkpoints, which supposedly besieged, killed, and sniped people. She replied: “More than one family left before our family. There were sniping incidents, and we had no other choice; Either we try to get out or die of starvation (...) It was the regime that controlled the road, and it was the one that carried out sniping operations. Multiple people from the area were killed as a result, and my children and I walked for two days in the forest until we were able to get out. There, the regime checkpoint guards searched us and told us that we left our men inside to fight the army and we got out of the area.”

The Defense Counsel also asked her about an old dispute between her family and Asmael K.’s family, related to land or properties. She denied knowing about this dispute and said that she was ten years old at the time.; She clarified that she did not know anything, nor did she hear about such a dispute later.

The Defense Counsel wanted to know to which extent she knew Al-Mantikah Branch [Eng: The Area Branch; Branch 227]. She explained that she knows that it is a [intelligence services] branch of the regime where detainees were tortured and mentioned that her brother was killed there under torture. In response to a question by the Defense Counsel, she denied that Asmael K. was there, adding that if he had been there, he would not have come out alive.

The other Defense Counsel asked questions about the source of the weapons in her husband's battalion. She answered that she did not know and never thought about inquiring.

Finally, she answered a question about whether she knew [redacted name] in the affirmative, saying that he was [redacted name]'s brother. She then denied having discussed these old events with anyone in Germany.

At the end of the session, the Judge announced that the witness might be resummoned later and noted that the next session will end at 12:30PM.

The proceedings were adjourned at 3:17PM.

The next trial day will be on August 29, 2024, at 9:30AM.

 Day 19 – August 29, 2024

 In the second session this week, the Judges heard a new witness.

Today’s witness was P9 [redacted name]. He was born in the town of Al-Hajar Al-Aswad, and he is 33 years old. He left the town in 2012, first for [redacted location], then to [redacted location] where he lives and works at [redacted information].

After providing details on his personal background, he denied any kinship with the Accused, Mohammad A. and Asmael K. when questioned by the Judge, noting that he knew them by sight because they were residents of the same area.

The witness's answers to the Judge's questions revolved around the fact that he was young when he was in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad town when the revolution broke out. ISIS appeared later, and therefore he did not know many details. Most of the information he obtained was from people’s daily talks in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad or chatting with acquaintances and relatives via WhatsApp, who in turn, got their information from the rumors circulating among the people in town.

Upon questioning by the Judge, the witness spoke about his superficial acquaintance with Mohammad A. and about hearing information indicating that A. had friends from ISIS. Moreover, the witness recalled, A. worked as a driver in the police department before the revolution and fought along with his family against the regime at the beginning of the revolution. According to the witness, A. joined the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and following the death of his brother, A. joined the [redacted information] which consisted of approximately 30-40 people.

The Judge told the witness, “It's clear that you have no information because you left Al-Hajar Al-Aswad shortly before the emergence of ISIS and moved to [redacted location]. So, I am asking you about what you heard. Was there any communication between you and acquaintances, relatives or parents there?” The witness replied that the communication was sporadic and not constant; it was limited to circulating news of executions or deaths, noting that he did not discuss politics with them, because this topic was uninteresting to him.

The Judge intervened, wondering why he was indifferent to politics and surprised by his cold reaction despite what was happening in his country. The witness replied that he did not mean that. He explained that he certainly grieved for what happened in his country, but he did not delve into politics.

Concerning the Accused Mohammad A., the witness added that he had heard information that A. might have been working as an informant for ISIS and was doing “dirty deals” with them, that he was not a good person, that he made a lot of mistakes and obtained “financial funding”, reiterating that the source of his information was the rumors circulating among the people, acquaintances and relatives in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad.

When the Judge asked him what he meant by “dirty deals” which he mentioned not only today but had also stated earlier during the police investigation, the witness said that he meant that Mohammad A. “sat and had relations with them.”

In response to a question about Mohammad A.'s official affiliation with ISIS and his allegiance to it, the witness denied knowing anything about it, adding that Mohammad A.'s visits to ISIS and his friendship with members of it mean that A. was affiliated with them.

The Judge asked the witness about information that he mentioned during the police questioning, namely that he was sure that “Mohammad A. is affiliated with ISIS but that the witness did not know in which area specifically. He also stated that he did not know whether the Accused was with the elite forces nor anything related to Asmael K.” The witness confirmed having stated this, explaining that he had heard this information “from people” but he did not know whether Mohammad A. had a certain rank or position within ISIS.

The witness mentioned the names of those he described as ISIS leaders in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad and Yalda [Rural Damascus], namely [redacted name] and [redacted name], pointing out that [redacted name] was a friend of Mohammad A. before the events [before 2011]. Moreover, he noted, these individuals along with [redacted name] and [redacted name] were known among the people as ruthless and merciless.

Subsequently, the witness recounted the story of his brother, [redacted name], and his cousin who disappeared after approaching ISIS to retrieve money and weapons for [redacted name]. After it was rumored that they [his brother and cousin] had fled to the regime areas, a year and a half later, it was revealed that they were executed by ISIS.

The Prosecutor wanted to know what the witness knew about [redacted name]. The witness answered that they lived together in the same neighborhood, and “before the crisis [before 2011],” this person was detained by the intelligence services and released at the beginning of 2012. The witness also heard that this person had secretly joined ISIS and “was involved in the slaughter of many people. One of his victims was a person named [redacted name]”.

After that, the Prosecutor asked the witness if he knew other people who were affiliated with ISIS “secretly” like [redacted name]. The witness replied that he mentioned [during the police questioning] the name of a person “who is in Austria”, pointing out that such individuals were present [in Al-Hajar Al-Aswad]. However, he added, people could not talk about them [because they were afraid of ISIS]. 

The Prosecutor asked about the raid and execution incident highlighting that it was “important in the case”. The witness answered that the culprit was [redacted name] and his group, in addition to [redacted name]. He further noted that both individuals were there [during the execution] at the time, but he did not know whether they were the ones who carried out the raid.

The witness recalled that one of the executed individuals was [redacted name], one of his relatives, who was with [redacted name] and [redacted name] at the time of the raid. He further recounted that [redacted name] and [redacted name] were skirmishing with ISIS members during their search for [redacted name] [one of the disappeared].

Before the Judge announced a short break, the Defense Counsel asked about the Al-Mantikah Branch, and the witness replied that he knew it: “It is the military security branch in Kafr Sousseh كفر سوسة, Damascus.”In response to a question about whether Asmael K. was in prison in Syria, the witness replied that he had heard that K.’s relatives were in prison, not K.

***

[15-minutes-break]

***

The witness reiterated that the source of his information is what he heard from people in general and therefore, he could not deny or confirm it. Regarding the people he was asked about, referring to A.’s ISIS-affiliated friends, the witness added, he only knew them because they were from the same region [Al-Hajar Al-Aswad] and “from the [redacted name] or [redacted name] clan.”

The Defense Counsel asked the witness if he told his brother [redacted name], who lives in [redacted location], about his testimony before the Court today. The witness answered that he did not tell him. The Defense Counsel expressed his surprise that the witness did not inform his brother that he would testify in court today, knowing that [redacted name] could be aware of the same details. All the more, as revealed by the Defense Counsel, due to the fact that the brother would testify before the Court as well. Nervously laughing, the witness said that he does not conceal anything from his brother and there are no secrets between them. However, he added, he simply did not tell his brother without any reason.

The witness also spoke about [redacted name]; who was a well-known person and a battalion leader in the area. According to the witness, [redacted name] was affiliated with [redacted name]’s group. The witness noted that he only heard of [redacted name] and his affiliation after he disappeared along with his brother, [redacted name], and his cousin, [redacted name] [the witness's brother and cousin].

The Defense Counsel then asked the witness about his relationship with Mohammad A.’s family. The witness replied that he had nothing to do with them and that he was young at the time. When the Defense Counsel mentioned that he had information that the witness proposed to a woman from Mohammad A.’s family, the witness denied. 

Regarding communication between him and Mohammad A., whether through personal conversations or via Messenger or Facebook, the witness explained to the Defense Counsel that there was no communication between him and Mohammad A. at all. He added that he saw him once by coincidence on the street “before the events [before March 2011].”

The proceedings were adjourned at 11:15AM.

The next trial day will be on September 5, 2024, at 1:30PM.

  ___________________________

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