Accused Islamic State bride Zeinab Ahmad denied bail over ‘unacceptable’ terrorism risk after slavery charges

Accused Islamic State bride Zeinab Ahmad has been refused bail after a magistrate found there was “no compelling evidence” she had renounced the terror group and that she posed an unacceptable terrorism risk.

Chief Magistrate Lisa Hannan on Wednesday rejected the 31-year-old’s bid for release in the Melbourne Magistrates Court, finding Ms Ahmad had failed to establish exceptional circumstances and that no bail conditions could adequately manage the risk.

Ms Ahmad and her mother, Kawsar Ahmad, are facing Australia’s first prosecution for alleged crimes against humanity over allegations they were involved in the enslavement of a Yazidi teenager while living under ISIS rule in Syria.

They were both arrested at Melbourne airport, upon their return to Australia from Syria, last month.

Judge Hannan said she had assessed whether Ms Ahmad posed a terrorism risk but found that even “a small risk of this kind would likely be unacceptable,” she said.

Ms Ahmad has, through her barrister, claimed she did not support ISIS, rejected the organisation, had a “deep anger” towards it and was grateful to be back in Australia but the magistrate found there “has been no compelling evidence of renunciation”.

Judge Hannan said comments Ms Ahmad made to psychologist Dr Julianne Read and through counsel were made after her arrest, after separation from her daughter and in the context of a bail application.

“They are in my view insufficient to counter the evidence of her words and actions in Syria which exhibit clear risk to the community if they are still adhered to,” she said.

“I accept that a period of years has passed but beliefs can be enduring and hard to shift.

“In my view, words spoken to others and said in the circumstances of this matter are not sufficient to give the court confidence that the applicant’s risk is reduced by real change.”

Ms Ahmad is charged with using a slave and intentionally exercising powers attaching to the right of ownership over the complainant in circumstances where the conduct was allegedly committed as part of a widespread or systemic attack against a civilian population.

Both offences, alleged to have occurred between June 2017 and November 2018 in Syria’s Deir ez-Zur province, carry a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment.

In August 2014, ISIS launched an attack on the Yazidi community in northern Iraq, killing men and enslaving, raping and abusing Yazidi women, girls and younger boys.

Ms Ahmad left Australia in November 2014 with her husband, Abu Dawod, stating on her outgoing passenger card that she intended to spend seven months in Türkiye.

However, in January 2015, Ms Ahmad — along with her mother, father and other family members — entered Syria.

The prosecution alleged Ms Ahmad communicated from Syria with family and friends back in Australia via Facebook and allegedly expressed support for ISIS and violent jihad.

She allegedly made posts including a quote justifying the burning alive of a captured Jordanian pilot, a quote inciting violence against America, comments about destroying the United States and its allies and posts about her husband’s death in Syria.

The prosecution alleged that in March 2015 the applicant posted on Facebook a statement that said her reason for being in Syria was “Hijrah” which means to migrate and join the caliphate or ISIS.

The court heard Ms Ahmad also posted in March 2015: “I’m very happy where I am, I love it here but miss you all”.

In May 2016 Ms Ahmad confirmed her husband had been killed in a drone strike. A couple of months later, she posted a photograph of part of a martyrdom letter he had written.

Judge Hannan noted the prosecution relied on Ms Ahmad’s travel to and residence in Syria under ISIS, her marriages to three ISIS fighters, alleged regular payments, possession of an ISIS identification card, alleged familiarity with firearms and alleged expressions of support for ISIS ideology.

The complainant, a Yazidi woman who cannot be identified, told investigators she was captured by ISIS at age 15, separated from her family and sold as a sex slave.

She told police she was bought for $US10,000 by Ms Ahmad’s father, Mohammed Ahmad, around Ramadan in 2017.

It is alleged Mr Ahmad told her: “I bought you for the purpose of raping and at the same time serving the home” and that he repeatedly sexually and physically assaulted her.

The victim alleged Ms Ahmad treated her badly, ordered her to perform tasks around the house, would not let her leave if she wanted to and was “in charge of everything” when her parents were not home.

The court heard the complainant alleged Ms Ahmad had a Glock pistol in her bedroom and “liked Daesh and thought they were good”.

Ms Ahmad’s defence argued she should be granted bail because the case would likely be delayed for years due to its complexity, offshore evidence, foreign witnesses, mutual assistance processes and potential public interest immunity claims involving government agencies.

Judge Hannan accepted there might be delays but said the defence submission that the trial would not be heard for at least three years was speculative.

“In my view ... delay would not of itself constitute exceptional circumstances,” she said.

The defence also relied heavily on the impact of Ms Ahmad’s detention on her young daughter, who spent her life in Syrian detention camps before being repatriated to Australia.

The court heard a forensic psychological report, prepared by Julianne Read, assessed the child as having post-traumatic stress disorder and found her symptoms had intensified since being separated from her mother.

Dr Read described Ms Ahmad as an emotionally attuned, devoted and nurturing mother who had provided her daughter with safety, regulation and emotional security.

“It is a sad fact that a parent’s ongoing custody affects a child negatively, however that of itself is not exceptional,” Judge Hannan said.

Ms Ahmad’s uncle Abraham Abbas has offered to provide a home for his niece and her daughter and offered a $75,000 bail guarantee.

But judge Hannan found Ms Ahmad’s terrorism risk could not be managed by bail conditions because of the nature of the alleged risk and the unknowns surrounding Ahmad’s ideology.

“I am satisfied that the prosecution has discharged the burden of establishing that there is a risk . . . and that risk is unacceptable,” she said.

“I am further satisfied that there are no conditions capable of making that risk acceptable because of the nature of the risk and it substantially lying in belief and adherence to ideology.”

Ms Ahmad was remanded in custody until her next mention on July 31.