Judgment in the Case of L. I.

Court	Stockholm District Court, Sweden
Case number	B 3210-23
Decision title	Judgment
Decision date	2 February 2025
Parties	Swedish Prosecution Authority, National Unit Against International and Organized Crime L. I.
Categories	Crimes against humanity, Genocide, War crimes
Links	Judgment
Other countries involved	Iraq Syria

Summary

The Stockholm District Court found L. I. guilty for her involvement in IS’ campaign against the Yazidi community. After establishing that IS’ August 2014 Sinjar offensive and the subsequent pattern of killings, enslavement, rape, forced transfer of children, and destruction of religious sites amounted to genocide, crimes against humanity, and serious war crimes, the court examined L. I.’s individual accountability.

The nine victims in the case—three women and six children—were all Yazidis captured during the Sinjar attack after their male relatives were executed or went missing. They were moved through various IS collection points and bases in Iraq and Syria, where they endured severe abuse and were traded as slaves. Ultimately, all nine victims came under L. I.’s control at her residence in Raqqa.

The court found that L. I. knowingly accepted these enslaved Yazidis into her home, treated them as her property, and kept them in captivity. She controlled their movement, forced household chores, restricted their food, and physically assaulted at least one woman and one child. She compelled the women and older children to attend Qur’an lessons, pray multiple times daily, and banned the use of the Kurmanji language. She also prohibited Yazidi religious and cultural practices and forced women and girls to wear religiously prescribed clothing. Repeatedly, she called them “infidels” and “slaves” and, in some cases, played IS execution videos to threaten them. L. I. also arranged staged photographs of the victims for sale within IS’ slavery network and helped transfer two family groups to other IS members, knowing they would face further rape, suffering, and separation.

The court concluded that these actions, carried out with IS’ genocidal intent, constituted genocide, crimes against humanity, and serious war crimes. It sentenced her to 12 years in prison and awarded 150,00 SEK in moral damages to each surviving victim.

Procedural history

In the mid-1990s, L. I., a Swedish national, converted to Islam and married J. M. (p. 30).

Between 2002 and 2013, L. I. moved several times, first to the United Arab Emirates, then to Sweden, England, and Egypt respectively (pp. 30–31).

In April 2013, L. I. went to Turkey to live with her husband and was taken across the border to Syria where she stayed with J. M. until he was killed on 5 August 2013 (p. 31).

In July 2014, after moving around Syria, L. I. settled in Raqqa and remarried to a member of IS (p. 31).

In 2017, L. I. and her husband left Raqqa, but her husband soon died after traveling to Iraq (p. 31).

In February 2019, after staying in various places around Syria, L. I. was displaced from her home in Baghuz and taken to the Al Hol refugee camp. She was eventually deported to Sweden (p. 31).

On 4 March 2022, the Stockholm District Court sentenced L. I. to six years in prison for war crimes (p. 32).

In 2022, Swedish authorities begin to coordinate with UNITAD and IIIM to collect evidence on IS crimes against Yazidis (p. 37).

In December 2022, in conjunction with Swedish authorities, UNITAD began to interview victims who identified L. I. as a perpetrator (pp. 37–38).

On 20 June 2024, the Stockholm District Court in a separate case affirmed the existence of a non-international armed conflict in Syria since at least 1 January 2012 (p. 77).

On 19 September 2024, Swedish authorities charge L. I. for her part in IS’s crimes against the Yazidis (press release).

On 2 February 2025, the Stockholm District Court announced this judgment.

Related developments

On 17 February 2025, the prosecutor appealed, requesting the sentence be changed from 12 years to life imprisonment.

On 11 November 2025, the Svea Court of Appeals affirmed the initial sentence of 12 years imprisonment.

Legally relevant facts

The Yazidis are a predominantly Kurdish-speaking ethno-religious minority historically linked to the area around the Sinjar Mountains in northern Iraq (p. 27). Yazidism is considered one of the world’s oldest religions, dating back to ancient Mesopotamia (p. 27).

Since at least January 2012, there was a non-international armed conflict in Syria involving the Islamic State (IS) (p. 77). In the summer of 2014, IS declared a caliphate in Iraq and Syria, and established a state-like structure under a strict Salafist interpretation of Islam, controlled by a violent Islamic militia (pp. 19, 60).

On 3 August 2014, IS launched a coordinated attack on Yazidi villages in Sinjar with the explicit purpose of eliminating the Yazidi population (pp. 64, 72). In the attack, IS captured thousands of people, enslaving the women and children, and executing the men who refused to convert to Islam (pp. 64–65). The Yazidis enslaved by IS were subjected to extreme brutality, forced to preform domestic work, coerced into converting to Islam, and raped (p. 65–69). The boys, upon reaching puberty, were sent to military camps to join IS (p. 66).

Following the attack in Sinjar, nine Yazidi women and children, most under age ten, were sent to serve L. I. in Raqqa (p. 98–99). In L. I.’s enslavement, the women and children were subjected to abuse and molestation, exposed to offensive language, forced to watch extrajudicial killings of Yazidi men, perform household chores, and provided with limited food (p. 95). L. I. also forbade the women and children from speaking their language, practicing their religion, or engaging in their culture (p. 95). Instead, L. I. forced them to convert to Islam and wear religious clothing (p 95). L. I. also participated in the slave trade, having the women and children photographed with the intent of selling them (p. 95).

The Yazidis are still unable to return to their cultural home and are spread throughout the world (p. 69). Due to IS’s actions, it is likely that the Yazidi community will cease to exist (p. 73).

Core legal questions

Under Section 1 of the Act on Criminal Responsibility for Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, is the Yazidi community a protected “religious group”, did IS act with the specific intent to destroy them, and do the acts taken by IS satisfy the elements for genocide? If so, did L. I. share in the genocidal purpose and commit a qualifying act?

Under Section 2, did IS’ conduct constitute a widespread or systematic attack on civilians, and did the specific acts meet the elements of a crime against humanity? If so, were L. I.’s actions part of that attack and do they fulfil the underlying elements?

Under Section 5, does IS’ conduct have a sufficient nexus to the non-international armed conflict in Syria and does this conduct violate Section 4? If so, under Section 3, do the Yazidis meet the definition of “protected persons”? If so, Did L. I. participate in the armed conflict in furtherance of IS’ conduct?

Specific legal rules and provisions

Sections 1–5, and 11 of Act on Criminal Responsibility for Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes.

Court's holding and analysis

The court found that IS committed genocide against the Yazidi population, a protected religious group, through its campaign of enslavement, forced conversion, and domestic labour (pp. 199, 202). L. I. shared IS’ intent to eradicate the Yazidi population and facilitated this by enslaving the injured parties and forcibly relocating Yazidi children to IS supports, violating Section 1 of the Act on Criminal Responsibility for Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes (pp. 199, 202).

The court also determined that IS committed crimes against humanity via an extensive and systematic attack against the Yazidis, involving executions, severe suffering, slavery, imprisonment, and persecution (p. 209). L. I. participated in this attack by inflicting severe suffering through inhumane treatment, slavery, detention, and persecution against the injured parties, thereby violating Section 2 (p. 209).

Furthermore, the court held that IS committed war crimes against the Yazidis because its actions were linked to the armed conflict and driven by IS’ ideology and policies (p. 212). Because L. I’s actions depended on the armed conflict and IS’ establishment, her participation in causing severe suffering though inhuman treatment of the injured parties qualifies as a war crime under Section 3 (p. 213). Since these acts were part of IS’ plan to target the Yazidis and some of the injured parties are children, the acts are considered serious war crimes under Section 11 (p. 213).

The court sentenced L. I. to 12 years in prison, finding her guilty of all charges (p. 221).