Europe and Terrorist Trials

[Annie]

They are beginning to recognize they have a problem:

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,1545583,00.html

Another terror trial without a hard conviction this week has illustrated once more the difficulties the German judiciary has in putting terror suspects behind bars. But some experts say prosecutors are learning.

When a Berlin court on Wednesday acquitted Ihsan Garnaoui on charges of trying to form a terrorist organization, law enforcement officials and experts rolled their eyes.

In its decision, the court said that the 34-year-old Tunisian, arrested by police in March 2003, had planned "to commit at least one attack in Germany using explosives," but said there was not enough to convict him on charges of forming a terrorist group.

But Garnaoui won't be walking free. Using a strategy analysts say should be employed more in coming terror trials, prosecutors pinned him on charges of tax evasion, passport fraud and illegal possession of a gun. The convictions earned him a sentence of three years and nine months and meant he would be deported after getting out of jail.

"They didn't get him on the most interesting charge, but on a number of other charges," said Hans-Jörg Albrecht, director of the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law. "They got Al Capone on charges like tax evasion, as well. Not on the more serious crimes he may have committed."

Legal shortcomings in terror trials

The strategy could show the way for a more effective way of prosecuting terrorism suspects at a time when the German judiciary is under pressure to produce some success stories, said Albrecht. Last year, Abdelghani Mzoudi, an accomplice to the planners of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was

acquitted by a Hamburg court and Mounir el Motassadeq (photo), the only person worldwide convicted in connection with the 2001 attacks, won retrial because the court didn't hear crucial testimony.

The acquittals have frustrated German government leaders eager to show that they are winning the fight against terrorism. There has been talk of tweaking the legal system to lower the burden of proof in terror trials, something considered in other countries such as the United Kingdom.

"You find the same problems in English, American and French trials as well," said Albrecht. "It's a problem that every court has."

The difficulties lie in classifying a group of people who might share the same ideology or beliefs as a criminal organization. After establishing that Garnoui, who had visited Afghanistan in 2001 and divorced his liberal German wife in 2003, held extremist beliefs, prosecutors were unable to portray him as the ringleader of others with similar attitudes.

Two undercover agents too unbelievable

Police, who had been tailing him, broke into his apartment to arrest him on March 20, 2003, and found bomb-making instructions and mobile phones that they allege could be used as triggering devices. But the testimony of two undercover agents, who were not present at the trial, was deemed too thin by the court. His plans to carry out bomb attacks, though partly proved by the prosecution, were not enough for a harder charge.

"It's clear he planned something, but planning alone is nothing," Michael Rosenthal, the defense lawyer on the trial, told reporters, according to the Associated Press. "What was missing was the start of the execution."

For Kai Hirschmann, a security expert with a focus on terror investigation strategy, the failure is another reason for Germany to radically re-think its legal structure. Following the realization that the Sept. 11
attacks were planned in Hamburg, the government passed two security packages that eased the burden on prosecutors. Hirschmann said that legislation needs another clause.

Punishing Jihad-ism

"We need to be able to charge people for sharing this Jihadist ideology, which automatically leads to violence," he said. "We need to treat Jihadism in the same way we do national socialism."

Such a major change would require an unusual alliance of the government and its biggest opposition party and is unlikely in the coming years. For the time being, said Albrecht, lumping major charges like terrorism, with smaller charges might be the best way for lawyers working within the current system.

"It's a strategy that is more promising," he said. "Especially against terrorist or criminal organizations that don't reveal themselves as such."

http://www2.rnw.nl/rnw/en/currentaffairs/region/netherlands/10786475?view=Standard

A court in the Dutch city of Rotterdam has acquitted an 18-year-old man of making preparations for terrorist attacks in the Netherlands, but jailed him for three months after finding him guilty of illegally possessing arms. The court found there was insufficient evidence to substantiate the terrorism charges against Samir Azzouz, a Dutch Muslim of Moroccan descent. The prosecution - which had earlier called for a seven-year prison term - has said it intends to appeal against the verdict.

Samir Azzouz was arrested in June 2004 following a raid on a supermarket in which, according to the authorities, he was involved. Police searched his home and found maps, plans and other information relating to potential targets in the Netherlands, including the lower house of parliament, the Borssele nuclear power plant, Amsterdam's Schiphol airport, the ministry of defence and the headquarters of the AIVD secret service.

Inadmissible
The police also came across instructions on how to carry out an attack and fragments of material showing a person being shot and beheaded. Weapons and bomb-making materials were also discovered. The court, however, held that this material was 'flawed' and could not be used as evidence against the accused.


The court's decision means the immediate release of Samir Azzouz, who has already served his three-month sentence whilst on remand awaiting trial.

The arrest of Samir Azzouz in 2004 led the ministry of justice to issue a terrorist alert for parts of the country, and security was tightened at the above-mentioned target locations.
The public prosecutor's office is deeply disappointed with the verdict and has announced its intention to appeal. Meanwhile, Samir Azzouz himself was visibly relieved upon hearing the outcome, a marked change from the arrogant pose he had adopted throughout the trial; exemplified by his refusal to stand when the court came into session.

No threat
His defence lawyers were also very pleased with the verdict; having maintained throughout the proceedings that their client should be acquitted because the 'evidence' obtained during the house search was unlawful. They also said their client's alleged involvement in the supermarket robbery was exaggerated deliberately to justify searching his home, and that the 'preparations' of which he was accused can only qualify for criminal sanctions if they constitute a 'direct and concrete threat'. According to one defence lawyer, there was no such threat because "the materials found during the search posed no threat whatsoever. For example, you can't make a bomb from them."

In January 2003, Samir Azzouz and a friend tried to enter Chechnya with the aim of helping the Muslim fighters there. Russian police stopped them at the border and sent them home. Since that time, the AIVD intelligence service has kept an eye on him.

In October 2003, he and four others were detained on suspicion of planning an attack. They were set free again a short time later due to a lack of evidence.

Bad omen?
The failure of this case is not a good sign for the authorities in the Netherlands, who are currently preparing a number of other terrorism-related cases. Samir Azzouz is still believed to have been a member of the terrorist network known under the codename of the 'Hofstad' group, to which Mohammed Bouyeri - the man charged with the murder of film maker Theo van Gogh - is said to have also belonged.

That allegation did not feature in this trial, as the investigation into the Hofstad group is still ongoing. However, the possibility remains that he will be charged in that connection at a later date. His defence team seems relatively unconcerned about this prospect; with one of them suggesting that there is also insufficient proof to substantiate such a charge. The lawyer in question is also acting on behalf of another alleged member of the group, and is now convinced that those proceedings will end in acquittal.

While prosecutors had set out to focus purely on 'hard' evidence in the case against Samir Azzouz, their efforts have not resulted in a conviction, and some believe this does not bode well for the proceedings against the alleged 'Hofstad' members. So far, no one in the Netherlands has ever been successfully prosecuted on terrorism-related charges.