The Prosecutor v. Al Hassan Ag Abdoul Aziz Ag Mohamed Ag Mahmoud

Court	International Criminal Court (Trial Chamber X), The Netherlands
Case number	ICC-01/12-01/18
Decision title	Trial Judgment and Sentencing Judgement
Decision date	20 November 2024
Parties	The Office of the Prosecutor: Karim A. A. Khan; Nazhat Shameem Khan; Mame Mandiaye Niang. Counsel for the Defence: Ms. Melinda Taylor, representing Mr. Al-Hassan Ag Abdoul Aziz Ag Mohamed Ag Mahmoud. Legal Representatives of Victims: Seydou Doumbia; Mayombo Kassongo; Fidel Luvengika Nsita.
Other names	The Al Hassan case.
Categories	Crimes against humanity, War crimes
Keywords	murder, Al Qaeda, crimes against humanity, International Criminal Court (ICC), Non-international armed conflict, war crimes
Links	Trial Judgment Sentencing Judgment
Other countries involved	France Mali

Summary

Between April 2012 and January 2013,the armed Islamist groups Ansar Dine and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) took control of Timbuktu, Mali. The current case concerns the acts committed by Mr. Al Hassan who was the chief of the Islamic Police and was involved in the Islamic Court’s work.At the time that Mr. Al Hassan was the Chief of the Islamic Police, he enforced discriminatory laws and committed religious persecution, among other crimes. Through his role in the Islamic Court, Mr. Al Hassan took part in the transfer of accused persons, and implemented the judgments and sentences handed down by the Islamic Court.

On 26 June 2024, the ICCconvicted Mr. Al Hassan of several of the charges brought against him of war crimes and crimes against humanity. During the sentencing judgement, the Court considered the mitigating circumstances of the minor actions taken by Mr. Al Hassan to assist the civilian population in 2012-2013 and his cooperation with the Prosecution at the investigation stage. Mr. Al Hassan wassentenced to 10 years of imprisonment on 20 November 2024. The time which Mr. Al Hassan had spent in detention from 28 March 2018 to 20 November 2024, was deducted from his sentence. As such, Mr. Al Hassan will be serving his sentence for committing the war crimes of torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity, sentencing without due process, and mutilation, as well as the crimes against humanity oftorture, persecution, and other inhumane acts.

Procedural history

Arrest Warrant issued by Pre-Trial Chamber I: 27 March 2018 (ICC-01/12-01/18-10-Conf, para. 5).

Arrest: 27March2018, by French forces in Mali (para.136, Sentencing Judgment).

Transfer to ICC custody: 31 March 2018 (para.136, Sentencing Judgment).

First appearance before Trial Chamber I: 4 April 2018.

Confirmation of charges: 8-17 July2019.

Confirmation of charges: 30 September 2019.

Trialopened in Trial Chamber X: 14 July 2020.

Prosecutors present evidence: February 2022.

Defence present evidence: May 2022.

Closing statements: May 2022.

Trial judgment: 26 June 2024.

Sentencing judgement: 20 November 2024.

Related developments

On 17 December 2024, the defence and prosecution teams withdrew from the appeals on the guilty verdict and sentencing judgement, making the judgements final.The reparations proceedings are ongoing as of 2025. Mr. Hassan will remain in the ICC detention centre until a country to serve his sentence is designated.

Additionally, Mr. Al Hassan has asked for forgiveness from the victims in Timbuktu.

Legally relevant facts

Between April 2012 and January 2013, armed Islamist groups (Ansar Dine, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) took control in theregion of Timbuktu, Mali (paras 1-4, Trial Judgment). Mr. Al Hassan was an alleged member of Ansar Dine, and was a de facto chief of the Islamic Police, involved in the Islamic Court’s work (para. 35, Sentencing Judgment). Some of Mr. Al Hassan’s acts constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity, including acts such as arbitrary arrests and torture in connection to the operations of the Islamic Courts (paras. 12-13, 131-134, Sentencing Judgment). Throughout the proceedings, the defence expressed their concerns that some of the prosecution’s evidence was allegedly retrieved by means of torture and coercion, which the ICC denied.

Core legal questions

What was the Court’s approach to classifying the situation in Mali as a non-international armed conflict?

What are the distinguishing factors between “forced” marriage and marriage “by negotiation”?

To what extent does international humanitarian law apply in cases where armed rebel groups take control of civilian populations?

To what extent is evidence allegedly obtained by torture admissible before the International Criminal Court?

Why was Mr. Al Hassan acquitted of the charges of destruction of cultural heritage as a war crime?

How can “gender-based persecution” be interpreted in the context of war crimes?

Specific legal rules and provisions

Trial Judgment:

Rome Statute:

a. Article 7(1)(f) of the Statute;

b. Article 7(1)(g) of the Statute;

c. Article 7(1)(h) of the Statute;

d. Article 7(1)(k) of the Statute;

e. Article 8(2)(c)(i) of the Statute;

f. Article 8(2)(c)(ii) of the Statute;

g. Articles 8(2)(e)(iv) of the Statute;

h. Article 25(3)(a) of the Statute;

i. Article 25(3)(c) of the Statute;

j. Article 25(3)(d) of the Statute;

Sentencing Judgement:

Rome Statute:

a. Article 7(1)(f) of the Statute;

b. Article 7(1)(k) of the Statute;

c. Article 8(2)(c)(i) of the Statute;

d. Article 8(2)(c)(ii) of the Statute;

e. Article 8(2)(c)(iv) of the Statute;

f. Article 7(1)(h) of the Statute;

g. Article 8(2)(c)(i) of the Statute;

h. Article 78(3) of the Statute;

i. Article 77(1) of the Statute.

Other Considerations:

a. Article 74 of the Statute;

b. Article 78(3) of the Statute;

c. Article 78(2) of the Statute;

d. Article 25(3)(d) of the Statute.

The Four Geneva Conventions of 1949:

a. Common Article 3.

Court's holding and analysis

Mr. Al Hassan was eventually charged with 14 counts, includingboth war crimes and crimes against humanity, under several modes of liability. Trial Chamber X of the ICC found Mr. Al Hassan guilty (para. 1785, Trial Judgement) under several modes of liability for the crime of torture (as a war crime and crime against humanity, Counts 1 and 3), other inhumane acts (as a crime against humanity, Count 2), persecution on religious grounds (as a crime against humanity, Count 13), as well as the war crimes of cruel treatment (Count 4), outrages upon personal dignity (Count 5), and violations of the right to a fair trial (Count 6).

The Court acquitted Mr. Al Hassan of the charges relating to destruction of protected property due to insufficient evidence (Count 7). The Court also did not find a causal link between the acts of rape/sexual slavery, and Mr. Al Hassan, therefore he was acquitted of those charges as well (Counts 9, 10, 11, and 12). Mr. Al Hassan was also acquitted of the charge of the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts in the form of forced marriage (Count 8).

The ICC issued its Sentencing Judgment on 20 November 2024. The Court analysed the crimes as per the Rome Statute and Article 3 of the Common Geneva Conventions of 1949. The Court considered all the submitted evidence, including witness statements and 7,896 relevant documents. Throughout the proceedings, the defence put forward mitigating circumstances, of which the Court only accepted two: good actions undertaken by Mr. Al Hassan to assist the civilian population in 2012-2013, and Mr. Al Hassan’s cooperation with the Prosecution at the investigation stage of this case (paras. 21-22, Sentencing Judgement). The Court, however, found that such mitigating circumstances would only have minimal consequences to Mr. Al Hassan’s sentence. The Court rejected the defence’s argument that Mr. Al Hassan’s young agewas a mitigating circumstance considering that Mr. Al Hassan was a mature 34-year-old adult at the time of committing the relevant crimes (para. 85, Sentencing Judgment). The Court also dismissed family circumstances as a relevant factor as they were common to most of the convicted persons and were not deemed exceptional (para. 87, Sentencing Judgment). Finally, the Court also rejected specific hardship experienced in detention and health as a mitigating factor (paras. 88-91, Sentencing Judgment).

The Court sentenced Mr. Al Hassan to 10 years of imprisonment. The time which Mr. Al Hassan has spent in detention in Mali was deducted from his sentence (para. 29, Sentencing Judgement). Mr. Al Hassan had the opportunity to appeal his sentence 30 days after the issuing of the judgment; however, he refused to do so.

Further analysis

There has been criticism concerning the fact that Mr. Al Hassan was found not guilty of crimes related to forced marriages, rape, assault, and in relation to acts committed by members of the Hesbahunder Mohammed Moussa(para. 8, Separate and Partly Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tomoko Akane) The “Hesbah” refers to the religious police force deployed by Ansar Dine in 2012-2013. Judge Tomoko Akane, in her dissent,argued that there was a lack of connection to the Hesbah and thatsome of the crimes for which Mr. Al Hassan was charged lacked common purpose to that of Ansar Dine. Concerning individual criminal responsibility of Mr. Al Hassan as per Article 25(3)(c) of the Statute, Judge Tomoko Akane has also argued that Mr. Al Hassan did not commit the act for the purpose of facilitating a crime (paras. 88-94, Separate and Partly Dissenting Opinion of Judge Tomoko Akane).