Case: Hasna A. -

Hasna A., a Dutch national, reportedly travelled to Syria in February 2015 together with her then four-year-old son who required special assistance. Upon her arrival, she married an ISIS fighter with whom she had more children and managed the joint household. The court of first instance found that between May and October 2015, Hasna A. stayed in the household of another ISIS fighter who kept a Yazidi woman as a slave. The court further found that ISIS committed a widespread and systematic attack against the Yazidi population of which Hasna A. was aware and of which the enslavement of the Yazidi woman was part of. Hasna A. participated in the enslavement by ordering the Yazidi women to do household work and taking care of her son. Due to a lack of evidence, the court of first instance acquitted Hasna A. of another count of crimes against humanity of enslavement of a second Yazidi woman. However, the court found Hasna A. guilty of membership in a terrorist organisation, promotion of terrorist crimes, and child endangerment. Concerning the latter, the court concluded that Hasna A. exposed her son to shelling and other conflict-related dangers in a conflict zone which had severe negative impact son his physical and mental development.
On 11 December 2024, the court of first instance sentenced Hasna A. to ten years imprisonment. The prosecutors previously demanded a sentence of eight years imprisonment. In determining the sentence, the judges, among others, took into account the mental health issues of the defendant due to which there was a reduced culpability at the time of the commission of the crimes.
Both plaintiff applied for compensation payments for their harm caused by Hasna A. in connection to their enslavement. However, the court found both applications to be inadmissible. First, since Hasna A. was acquitted of participating in the enslavement of one of the women due to a lack of evidence, the woman’s application for compensation was declared inadmissible as there were no legal grounds. Second, the court found that a decision on the compensation claim of the second woman would lead to an undue delay in the proceedings as the applicable Syrian legal framework must be applied which requires additional time and resources. This claim can, however, be brought before a civil court in a separate proceeding.