skip navigation

Search results

Categories: Terrorism

From the start of: 2015

To the end of: 2020

25 results (ordered by date)

<< first < prev   page 5 of 5   next > last >>

Prosecutor v. Abdelkarim El. B.

Urteil (Judgment), 8 Nov 2016, Higher Regional Court, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

On 8 November 2016, German foreign fighter Abdelkarim El B. was convicted of membership in a terrorist organisation abroad, illegally possessing a Kalashnikov, and committing a war crime by treating a protected person in a gravely humiliating or degrading manner. He had travelled to Syria in September 2013 in order to fight for ISIL. On 7 November 2013, El. B. and his fellow ISIL fighters found the corpse of a Syrian army soldier. While the defendant was filming and verbally encouraging them, the other fighters cut the nose and ears of the dead body, stepped on it and then shot it in the face.  On 10 February 2014, he was arrested at the German Embassy in Ankara, Turkey, and extradited to Germany on 25 February 2015. Abdelkarim El B. was sentenced to 8 years and 6 months of imprisonment. 

United States of America v. Arafat Nagi

, 23 May 2017, United States District Court for the Western District of New York, United States, United States

Arafat Nagi is an American citizen who resided in Lackawanna, New York, prior to his arrest. From 2012-2014, Nagi demonstrated support and sympathy for ISIL and the situation in Syria through social media, electronic communications with family members, and conversations with other associated individuals. He also purchased combat gear. During this time, he travelled to Turkey twice, which the U.S. alleged was with the goal of ultimately traveling to Syria to join ISIL as a fighter. While Nagi claimed he was visiting family, his iPad search history and travel plans indicated otherwise.


The U.S. arrested and detained Nagi soon after his return from Turkey and Yemen in 2014 and charged him with attempt to provide material support to ISIL.


Nagi argued the case should be dismissed because he was protected by the First Amendment. However, the district court held that the defendant’s attempt to join a foreign terrorist organization amounted to actions not protected by the First Amendment, which does protect advocacy or association with terrorist organizations. The district court found Nagi’s travel, communications, and purchase of combat gear sufficient to demonstrate an intent to provide support – in the form of himself – to ISIL. 

R. c. Habib, 2017 QCCQ 6948

Jugement sur la culpabilité (Judgment on guilt), 19 Jun 2017, Criminal and penal division, Court of Quebec, Canada

On 19 June 2017, Canadian citizen Ismaël Habib was the first adult found guilty of attempting to leave Canada to participate in the activities of a terrorist group. Mr. Habib had already travelled to Syria in 2013 for three months, but he was arrested and brought back to Canada as his passport had been cancelled by the Canadian authorities. Following initial suspicions, the Canadian police created an elaborate undercover operation by establishing a fictitious criminal organisation in which Mr. Habib was working. The accused was arrested in February 2016 after he confessed to a police undercover officer that he wished to leave for Syria to fight with ISIS. Even though the accused conceded that he had the primary intent of leaving Canada, there was a dispute on his reasons for doing so. While Mr. Habib argued that he wished to join his first wife and children in Syria, the prosecution contended that the defendant’s intent was to join ISIS and participate in its terrorist activities.

R. v. Hamdan: Regina v. Othman Ayed Hamdan

Oral Reasons for Judgment, 22 Sep 2017, Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada, Canada

Palestinian refugee Othman Ayed Hamdan was charged after posting on various Facebook accounts and pages regarding Middle East politics, particularly supporting ISIS presence in Iraq and Syria. He believed he was carrying out jihad, meaning struggle. The charges arose from 85 posts from Facebook accounts and pages. To prove the elements of the crime, the Crown had to prove two things: 1) that posts were likely to incite a reader to commit a terrorist act and 2) that Hamdan intended to incite his audience.

The Court determined that a reasonable person would find only one of the posts to be an active inducement to commit a terrorist act; however, the court also determined that the Crown could not prove Hamdan intended to induce a reader beyond a reasonable doubt. While the Court did not find Hamdan’s testimony on his intent credible, the court acquitted him because there was reasonable doubt.

The Prosecutor v. Salim Jamil Ayyash, Hassan Habib Merhi, Hussein Hassan Oneissi, Assad Hassan Sabra

Summary of Judgment, 18 Aug 2020, Special Tribunal for Lebanon (Trial Chamber), The Netherlands

On 14 February 2005, explosives equivalent to 2500 kgs of TNT were detonated in Downtown Beirut, killing former PM Rafik Hariri and 21 others and injuring 226 people.

In its judgement of 18 August 2020, the Trial Chamber found Mr. Ayyash guilty of co-perpetrating conspiracy for committing a terrorist act, committing a terrorist act by an explosive device, intentional homicide of Mr. Rafik Hariri with premeditation and by explosive materials, and attempted intentional homicide of 226 persons with premeditation by using explosive materials. The Court’s reasoning was based on the connection of Mr. Ayyash to mobile Red 741, which had been proven to have monitored Mr. Hariri’s movements and prepared for the attack.

The Trial Chamber, however, acquitted Messrs. Oneissi and Sabra for lack of sufficient evidence proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, their complicity to the attack, and acquitted Mr. Merhi for insufficient factual evidence surrounding his actions.

<< first < prev   page 5 of 5   next > last >>