Man faces five years in jail for spreading terrorist ideology among Rusaifa youth via soical media

The Court of Cassation has upheld a July State Security Court (SSC) ruling sentencing a man to five years in prison after he was convicted of promoting terrorist ideology among Rusaifa youth via social media over the past two years.

The defendant was convicted by the SSC of promoting Daesh ideology by convincing the youth in his area that they “are a legitimate group”, and was given the maximum punishment.

Court documents said the defendant adopted Daesh ideology in 2017 after monitoring the group’s activities on social media.

The defendant was convinced that Daesh applied the proper Sharia (Islamic law) and that the group was “defending Muslims in Syria and Iraq”, court papers said.

“The defendant decided to convince people in his area, especially young men, to join the terrorist group by spreading its ideology through audio and video clips on social media,” court documents said.

The SSC added that the defendant would also “gather young men who went to mosques to give them religious classes and spread Daesh ideology and material to them,” according to court documents.

The SSC general prosecutor asked the higher court to uphold the sentence, stating that the SSC had followed the proper procedures when sentencing the defendant.

The defendant contested the SSC ruling through his lawyers, claiming that he had been “subjected to torture and duress in order to confess to something that he did not do”.

The lawyer also charged that the SSC prosecutor had “failed to present any solid evidence that would implicate his client with the charges, and there was no lawyer present when the defendant was questioned by the security forces”.

“The SSC also regarded the witnesses who testified that my client never used social media to start with and did not adopt any extremist thoughts,” the lawyer said.

However, the higher court ruled that the SSC had followed the proper procedures and that the defendant deserved the verdict he had received.

“It was clear that the defendant confessed willingly to his actions and there was no evidence indicating that he did not do so,” the higher court ruled.

Source: Jordan Times