There is no hard evidence to convict men, defence lawyers tell Al Qaeda trial

These files also did not contain any receipts of money allegedly sent to Jabhat Al Nusra, an Islamist group fighting the regime of Bashar Al Assad in Syria, the lawyers claimed

ABU DHABI // There is not enough hard evidence to convict men accused of running an Al Qaeda cell, lawyers told the Federal Supreme Court on Monday.

The case files did not include images or videos related to jihad, or any instructions on how to make weapons or bombs, they told the court.

The files also lacked any receipts for money allegedly sent to Jabhat Al Nusra, an Islamist group fighting the regime of Bashar Al Assad in Syria.

Nine men – from Jordan, Tunisia, Lebanon and Palestine – are on trial at the court’s State Security Department, accused of running a terror cell in the UAE and sending funds to the Islamists.

They are also accused of spreading the group’s goals on the internet, recruiting for them and plotting to bomb UAE landmarks.

The lawyers also claimed yesterday that the State Security investigation was not thorough.

“The files did not include images, videos or soundtracks that were previously mentioned,” said defence lawyer Mohammed Al Khazraji, who represents one of the defendants. “Where is the evidence that they claim convicts the clients?”

Mr Al Khazraji said the officers from State Security had said the case files included receipts of financial transactions, but he did not see the receipts in the file.

“There are no exchange transactions between the UAE and Syria. How could they have sent the money? Is it possible a said terrorist group would stupidly save its documents?”

Jassim Al Naqbi, who represents two of the accused, claimed they had been scared by the line of questioning used in interrogations.

This might have made them say what the investigators wanted to hear, Mr Al Naqbi said.

Hamdan Al Zeyoodi, who represents another two of the accused, rejected claims that his clients used the internet for anything unusual.

“Are their actions considered as crimes? Did they do anything to harm the country?” he asked.

Mr Al Zeyoodi said the men had been charged with recruiting for Jabhat Al Nusra but the prosecution failed to give any names of people who had joined.

One of the defence team had requested the attendance of a doctor that treated his client, R F, 31, a Tunisian who claimed he was ill-treated in prison and had to seek psychological help.

Dr Abduljabar Quraishi, a psychiatrist from the National Security clinic, said the defendant came to him last November suffering severe depression.

The Tunisian said the medication the doctor gave him caused hallucinations.

“I started treatment immediately. After five days, he did not wish to continue the treatment. He did not give a reason,” said Dr Quraishi.

“We were just starting the treatment so it will not affect him. This treatment is needed for six months.”

Dr Quraishi said the side-effects of the antidepressant prescribed were nausea, dizziness and possible abdominal discomfort.

But he said they would not cause hallucinations and the condition would remain the same if he did not continue the treatment.

The three lawyers called for their clients to be acquitted.

Eight of the men were present in court, with one being tried in his absence.

The hearing was attended by three family members and a representative from the Tunisian embassy.

The next hearing was set for June 16 to complete the defence arguments.