Bail rejected for two terror suspects over alleged extremist material found on phones

Two Syrian nationals have been remanded in custody on terrorism charges while a third Syrian man charged with money laundering was granted bail, as police continue to investigate a suspected cell of Islamic extremists in Malta.

First to be arraigned on Friday afternoon was Pieta resident Ebrahim Ahmad, 35, from Homs in Syria. Police Inspectors Jean Paul Attard and Keith Mallan charged Ahmad, who told the court he was a plasterer, with money laundering, offering banking services without a licence and conspiracy to commit an offence in Malta.

Ahmad pleaded not guilty. 

Photo: James Bianchi/MaltaToday

Inspector Attard explained that Ahmad had been arrested in connection with the recently re-opened magisterial inquiry into the publication of terrorism-related materials on social media by a number of Syrian nationals residing in Malta. The inquiry had to be reopened after more materials surfaced, the inspector said. 

Answering a question from legal procurator Colin Galea, defence counsel to Ahmad together with lawyer Nicholas Mifsud, the inspector confirmed that the defendant had been on police bail which had been extended in July and had always obeyed his police bail conditions. 

Galea asked why the man had not been arraigned by summons, if there had not been any problems while on police bail. 

The defence requested Ahmad be released on bail. 

Prosecutor Antoine Agius Bonnici, representing the Office of the Attorney General together with lawyers Francesco Refalo and Rebekah Spiteri, objected to his release, explaining that the reopened inquiry was currently still open. “He is accused of operating an unlicensed financial institution. A large number of customers are being questioned by the police, leading to a fear of him suborning the witnesses,” Agius Bonnici said, adding that this had already happened with witnesses in the other case, against a group of men charged with terrorism-related offences.

“His situation is different today. Previously he was just a suspect, but today he is charged with money laundering which carries a possible long prison sentence. There are witnesses who still need to be spoken to, and police bail cannot be extended indefinitely. The list of people is very long.” Agius Bonnici explained that the investigation was focusing on around 30 individuals, some of whom may also be arraigned. 

Presiding Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit urged the prosecution to show more foresight, and that the defence could not be blamed for being unhappy with being given this justification. 

“I appreciate the difficulties you face, but I would like more thought in justifying your objections to bail. I can’t bear hearing the phrase ‘ongoing investigations’ anymore.”

Galea argued that after six months on police bail there was no evidence left to tamper with. “Had he wanted to speak to the witnesses, he would have spoken to them by now. It would be more likely that he would speak to witnesses from prison.”

Agius Bonnici protested that there was a strong link to the seven men who had been charged earlier this year.

Galea lambasted the prosecution, arguing that they had six months to finish their investigation before arraigning, and should not use it as a ground to object to bail. “I can’t see the realisticness of this fear. Had he wanted to flee he had time to flee, if he wanted to instruct witnesses, he had time to give them a PhD in what to say. Finish the investigation and then arraign. This is not good practice.”

“One must be balanced and not extremist in these matters.,” Mifsud added. “The fears aren’t just minimised in this case, but neutralised,” describing the prosecution’s case as being based on smoke and mirrors.

Asked by the court why the suspects were arraigned at this stage, Agius Bonnici replied that there was sufficient evidence to issue charges. “We are just saying that there is more to be investigated.”

Magistrate also rebuked the prosecution. “You know that you always face this objection, you should have learned your lesson by now. If you do not give me tangible evidence of what you will be doing in the coming days, I will be granting bail,” she warned.

Agius Bonnici protested that investigations take time. “ You need to see all the documents, produce a list of people to question.”
“So the other side already know who these people are?” asked the court. “Of course we know, we even have the list ourselves!” replied the Legal Procurator.

Having heard the submissions, the court granted the man bail against a €40,000 deposit and an €80,000 personal guarantee, in view of the serious nature of the case.

The defence informed the court that Ahmad was unable to afford the deposit and would be filing an application for a variation of his bail conditions in due course. He was remanded in custody until then.

Two men accused of terrorism offences

Next to be arraigned were plasterer and Hamrun resident Farhan Mohammed Sheikh 29 and Abdulla Aliwi, 23, who told the court that he lived in Paola. Both defendants were born in Homs, Syria.

Inspector Keith Mallan, prosecuting, told the court that Aliwi did not have a fixed address and was currently living with a friend of his in Paola. 
Both pleaded not guilty and requested bail.

Lawyer Jose Herrera,  who is assisting the defendants together with lawyers Franco Debono and Matthew Xuereb, made similar arguments to those submitted in the previous arraignment, but Agius Bonnici pointed out that the stakes in this case were much higher.

“This man is charged with terrorism and is facing life imprisonment,” he said. “He entered Malta illegally, has no ties to Malta, doesn’t have an official job.” One of the defendants had gone to Greece, applied for refugee status and was sent back to Malta, he added.

The prosecution objected to the men’s request for bail, citing national security, describing the men as a danger to the general population and on the grounds of public interest. 

“All they did was receive some material on their devices,” submitted Herrera. 

Debono argued that there was nothing to tamper with as the case against the seven men previously arraigned was public knowledge. “On a procedural level, even if the charges are different, it is similar to the previous arraignment, because both defendants were on police bail.” The court gave certain weight to that fact, said the lawyer, inviting it to do the same here. 

“I was certain that you would try to ride on the coattails of the previous arraignment,” reacted Magistrate Stafrace Zammit, nonplussed.

“Did this defendant attempt to contact witnesses, or escape? No.” Debono argued. “The prosecution’s submissions collapse when confronted with the fact that none of the fears they mentioned have materialised while the defendants were on police bail.”

“Had there been any weapons or bombs found, or financing of actual attacks, it would be one thing,” Herrera added. “But in the worst case this is a technical offence. They were not transmitting the material, they received it on their electronic devices. This is why Franco Debono was very correct. If someone goes to prison for life for having received something on his phone, we would be the laughing stock of the world.”

Xuereb added that the videos were already preserved in an inquiry.

Agius Bonnici rebutted the defence’s attempt to compare the two arraignments. “We are saying you cannot compare a money laundering offence with one relating to terrorism.”

The court, after hearing the submissions and taking into account the nature of the charges, which she described as “most serious,”  together with the need to protect public order and security and the risk of the defendants committing further crimes or absconding, as well as in view of the fact that the charges carry possible life sentences, said it “could not but deny bail to both defendants.”

Inspectors Jean Paul Attard and Zachary Zammit prosecuted Sheikh and Aliwi, assisted by lawyers Antoine Agius Bonnici, Francesco Refalo and Rebekah Spiteri from the Office of the Attorney General.