A Palestinian-born asylum seeker who wore a inexperienced headband supporting Hamas at a Trafalgar Sq. protest has escaped punishment.
Tunisian Khaled Hajsaad, 25, wore the scarf as 45,000 pro-Palestinian protestors marched by means of London calling for a everlasting ceasefire within the Gaza Strip on November 25, 2023.
He was convicted of carrying an article supporting a proscribed organisation below the Terrorism Act, 2000.
Hajsaad had denied the cost and claimed that his inexperienced headband with a ‘Shahada’ on it was an Islamic oath and expression of religion which had been coopted by Hamas.
District Decide Nina Tempia right this moment gave Hajsaad a conditional discharge for 3 months that means he is not going to be punished except he reoffends.
Palestinian-born asylum seeker Tunisian Khaled Hajsaad (pictured in November), 25, has escaped punishment for carrying a inexperienced headband supporting Hamas
Individuals collect in Trafalgar Sq. in London for a Professional-Palestine rally on November 25, the identical day that Hajsaad was seen carrying the Hamas headband
Hajsaad, who has been dwelling in Birmingham, was convicted of carrying an article supporting a proscribed organisation below the Terrorism Act, 2000
She didn’t ask him to pay any prices attributable to his restricted means as he lives on £49 per week.
The choose stated: ‘The offence right here was Mr Hajsaad carrying a bandana at an illustration.
‘Trying on the tips I’d put this on the lowest degree for culpability.
‘In respect of hurt it was argued no precise hurt was precipitated however I agree with the submission of the prosecution there was hurt because the conduct linked to help of a proscribed organisation.
‘The offence was dedicated seven weeks after 7 October.’
Hajsaad, of Smethwick, Birmingham, lived in Palestine till he was 5 and later lived in Tunisia, arriving within the UK a 12 months in the past.
He attended Westminster Magistrates Courtroom carrying a blue bodywarmer and tracksuit bottoms assisted by an interpreter.
A masked Hamas militant, holding an AK-47 rifle and carrying a scarf that reads ‘No gods just one God, Mohammed is Prophet of Allah’ in Gaza Metropolis in 2002
He instructed a probation officer he can not perceive why carrying the scarf is taken into account a criminal offense and that he didn’t consider he offended anybody in carrying it.
Tom Wainwright, defending Hajsaad, stated: ‘The offence for which he has been convicted of doesn’t imply he’s a supporter of Hamas.
‘It shouldn’t be stated or reported that he’s a supporter of Hamas.’
He stated that if Hajsaad supported Hamas he would have been charged with a extra severe offence.
The barrister added: ‘There is no such thing as a proof that anybody was precipitated misery, there is no such thing as a proof to on how lengthy he was carrying this headband and no proof anybody noticed it aside from cops.’
Mr Wainwright stated it was not proper to say that Hajsaad is liable for hurt or offence that could be precipitated to these studying about his actions within the media.
Hajsaad has no earlier convictions and little training.
‘He’s somebody who’s eager to study, somebody who has expertise of trauma,’ Mr Wainwright stated.
‘His first time in court docket has been a salutary lesson. It isn’t an expertise he desires to repeat. There is no such thing as a danger of him reoffending or being again earlier than the court docket.’
Prosecutor Gareth Weetman earlier requested the choose to contemplate the ‘misery’ brought on by Hajsaad’s headband and referred to the atrocities in opposition to Israel civilians on 7 October.
He stated: ‘November twenty fifth was the day in query and so it should be that the defendants actions lent help to a terrorist organisation very quickly after acts by that terrorist organisation on the 7 October, which might have been extraordinarily contemporary and uncooked within the minds of very many individuals.
‘Subsequently inflicting misery, important misery, to those that have been focused by that organisation each immediately and within the wider sense.
‘Pictures of these very excessive profile protests would have been broadcast worldwide.’
Two lecturers within the area, Professor Robert Gleave and Hugh Lovatt gave proof at trial.
They spoke in regards to the particular calligraphies of the Arabic script, in addition to how intently it resembled the Saudi Arabian flag.
Consultants in court docket spoke in regards to the particular calligraphies of the Arabic script, in addition to how intently it resembled the Saudi Arabian flag. Pictured: A Saudi Arabian flag flutters in Istanbul, Turkey, on October 20, 2018
Decide Tempia stated: ‘Each witnesses I heard from are clearly specialists of their area.
‘Each Mr Lovatt and Professor Gleave agreed that the Shahada was an announcement of religion.
‘Professor Gleave accepted that within the battle between Palestine and Israel there was no different organisation within the enviornment other than Hamas that was readily related to Shahada on a inexperienced background.
‘I’ve to resolve whether or not he was carrying it in such circumstances as to arouse affordable suspicion that he was a supporter of that proscribed organisation.
‘I’m glad that the crown have proved their case to the prison customary.
‘Hamas is probably the most notable Palestinian group related to the color inexperienced and given the context of the place the defendant was, carrying the scarf on a pro-Palestine march, there can be no motive for somebody to put on a scarf of a Saudi flag.
‘It clearly was not, it didn’t have the Saudi sword on it.
‘I’m glad so I’m certain that the defendant wore an merchandise of clothes, a inexperienced headband in such circumstances to arouse affordable suspicion that he was a supporter of a proscribed terrorist organisation, specifically Hamas.
‘I do discover that the hurt is severe and I’ve to agree that the character of the offence when it occurred, quickly after the incident of seven October, would have made important misery to those that have been observing the demonstration.’
Hajsaad, of Smethwick, Birmingham, denied however was convicted of carrying an article supporting a proscribed organisation below the Terrorism Act, 2000.
