THE first trial in the era of home-grown jihadi attacks in France has got under way amid tight security at a court in Paris. The main defendant is a brother of Islamic radical Mohammed Merah, who killed seven people, including three children, in attacks on a Jewish school and soldiers in the Toulouse region in 2012.
Mohammed Merah, 23, was killed in a shoot-out with police special forces after a 32-hour televised stand-off. His brother Abdelkader Merah, 35, is accused of complicity in the murders and faces life in prison if convicted.
Three Jewish children, a teacher and three paratroopers, including two Muslims, were killed over nine days in the attacks, which rocked France. Abdelkader Merah has been in custody since days after the killings. He has denied helping his brother, who trained with al-Qaeda-linked extremists in Pakistan.
Defence lawyer Eric Dupond-Moretti said earlier this year that his client was sent to trial “by default” because the actual killer was dead. He said in a TV interview: “There is no evidence in the case file to convict him. That’s what I think, that’s what I’ll say.
The trial is being held in a special Paris criminal court and heard by judges. It is expected to last one month with about 50 witnesses and a dozen experts called to the stand.
The five years the families of the seven victims have awaited the trial have been marked by an upsurge in deadly attacks in France, many of them carried out by young people born and radicalised in the country.
“This trial has to shed light, be clear, that the truth comes out, that justice be done, and that it becomes a part of history,” said Latifa Ibn Ziaten, the mother of a French paratrooper who was the first victim. Alongside Merah in the dock is an acquaintance of the two brothers, Fettah Malki. He is accused of providing weapons that Mohammed Merah used and faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted. Malki has maintained he was unaware of his friend’s deadly plot.
During his stand-off with police, Mohammed Merah told as intelligence negotiator he was acting on behalf of al Qaeda, but no-one else knew of his plans.
Abdelkader Merah had been on intelligence radars since 2006 for proximity to radical cells. Investigative judges described him as his brother’s religious mentor on the path of a radical Salafist Islam.
Merah has denied being the source of his brother’s radicalisation and said he condemned his killings, but also told an investigating judge he was “proud of the way he died, as a fighter, that’s what the Koran teaches us”.
While the two brothers had not seen each other for months because of a family quarrel, they got back in touch a few weeks before the attacks, Abdelkader Meraj told investigators.
He said Mohammed then “told him again about jihad” and that he knew his brother wanted to “move quickly”, according to court documents. He said he did not approve of his brother’s plans.
The pair met several times between the first killing on March 11, 2012, and Mohammed’s death on March 22, including for dinner a few hours after the younger brother killed two soldiers.
Investigators suspect the older brother of choosing the target for Mohammed’s first killing, via an advert posted by a soldier on the internet. Abdelkader is also accused of helping his brother steal the scooter he used for the rampage a few days later.
The victims at the Jewish school included a teacher, his sons, aged three and five, and the eight-year-old daughter of the school’s director. All four were shot at point-blank range over 14 seconds.
Abdelkader Merah denies any wrongdoing. A verdict is expected in early November.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here