Inside the Trial of Adnan A. #1: Security Reports? Never!

TRIAL OF ADNAN A.

The 4th Military Criminal Court – Damascus, Syria

Trial Monitoring Summary #1

Hearing Date: September 30, 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 provides a summary of the proceedings while redacting certain details to protect witness privacy and to preserve the integrity of the trial.]

SJAC’s 1st trial monitoring report details day 1 of the Adnan A. trial in Damascus, Syria. On this trial day, a public trial hearing was held to consider the case in the presence of the Accused and his Defense Counsel, without any Plaintiffs. The Accused faced the charge of kidnapping leading to death under torture during his work at the State Security Branch, as he was accused of writing security reports against individuals. However, the Accused denied the charges and attributed them to the Military Security Branch, claiming that his work was limited to administrative duties. Furthermore, the Accused recanted any confession he had made before the Investigating Judge.

Day 1 – September 30, 2026

There was media coverage by the Ministry of Justice.

The session commenced at 11:00AM.

The Accused, Adnan A., was brought in custody and appeared unhandcuffed. There were no Plaintiffs. Counsel C1, [redacted name], attended as Legal Counsel for the Accused.

The in-person trial commenced publicly.

The Presiding Judge instructed the Accused to listen to the evidence presented against him.

The Prosecutor read out a two-page written indictment and charged the Accused with kidnapping leading to death under torture. The Accused kidnapped O1, [redacted name], and led him to the State Security Branch without an arrest warrant, which led to his death under torture. The Accused arrested the victim from the school where he [the victim] worked as a teacher, and the victim ended up a corpse after losing his freedom and life under torture. Since the Accused committed his acts within a widespread and systematic policy, these acts constitute crimes against humanity, are not subject to statutes of limitations, and are not covered by amnesty decrees.

When asked about the charges against him, the Accused denied any connection to them and attributed them to the Military Security Branch. He affirmed his statements contained in the investigation report. However, he denied any confession he had made before the Investigating Judge. The Accused denied his involvement in  the arrest of any person. He noted that the statement regarding his entry into the school and his arrest of victim O1 was incorrect, expressing surprise that this was mentioned. Furthermore, he denied any participation in the arrest of other people or his submission of any security reports against any person.

When asked about the date he joined the State Security Branch, the Accused answered that he volunteered for State Security in 1986.

The Presiding Judge asked the Accused to state the historical events following his volunteering for State Security. The Accused answered that after 2010, he moved to Dar’a for health reasons. In 2011, he was assigned to administrative work in the [Ba’th] Party Division within the State Security Branch in Dar’a. His work was collecting party subscriptions and civil records of party members and adding them [to the database], however, he was not tasked with writing security reports. Later, he retired in 2015. He had no connection to any arrests. He stayed at his home until the time of liberation. He did not receive any weapon throughout his period of service.

The Accused added that he helped individuals wanted by the State Security Branch since he was in the Branch. Despite his administrative work, he held favor with the “Committee” and had an influential voice. He added that he helped, through his acquaintances [from the security personnel], many students who had exhausted their chances of passing [meaning unclear].

Upon questioning the Accused as to whether he had any information regarding executions of detainees inside the prison, cases of rape within the Security Branch by a Colonel in State Security, or the existence of mass graves, he denied everything mentioned in the preliminary investigations and affirmed that he had no connection to or knowledge of any aforementioned act.

The Presiding Judge wanted to know whether the Accused was present at the time of the storming of the Al-Omari Mosque. The Accused responded that he did not participate in any storming and was not present in any patrol.

Upon consultation, the Court decided to summon the Public Prosecution witnesses and adjourned the session to October 19, 2026.

The proceedings were adjourned approximately at 11:45AM.  

The next trial day will be on October 19, 2026, at 11:00AM.

___________________________

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