Madrid terrorism verdicts - if you're going to be on trial for terror, Spain is the place for you [Updated]

Aftermath of the attack in 2004

Remember the Madrid train bombings of 2004?

191 people lost their lives in an attack orchestrated by Al Qaeda, with the goal of persuading Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq (which they did), and reviving the Muslim Caliphate of southern Spain (which they have not done - yet).

Today, verdicts were handed out in the bombings. 28 people total were on trial, 19 Arabs of various nationalities and 9 Spaniards. All of them pleaded "not guilty" (which likely means that Spain had little to offer in exchange for guilty pleas). Seven were acquitted, and 21 convicted on various charges. One of the acquitted, an Egyptian named Rabei Osman Sayed Ahmed, will not go free, since he has already been sentenced in Italy for terrorism. If you want to dive into it, a detailed by-name list of the accused and their individual verdicts can be found here).

The support players in the attack were given sentences ranging from only 3 to 18 years in prison. But three of the leaders got, what initially looks like, a "real" sentence: Jamal Zougam, a Moroccan got an incredible 42,862 years (30 for each of 191 deaths, 20 for each 1,856 attempted murder, and 12 years for belonging to a terrorist organization). Using similar math, Otman El Ghanoui got 42,902 years (same formula as above but 60 added for "terrorist carnage") and Spaniard Jose Emilio Suarez Trashorras got 4,800 (25 years for each of 192 deaths - the 191 in the subway and 1 policeman during a later raid).

Those sound like pretty stiff sentences all right. Of course, it would be easier to use the US version, when we simply sentence someone to life without the possibility of parole (or execute them). But no matter, since such a stiff sentence means that Spain is really serious about combating terrorism, right?

Well, not so fast. The reality is that these sentences are all bark and no bite - in actuality, a legal fiction.

The reason is because, under Spanish law, the sentences must be all served concurrently. So the most they can really serve is 40 years. That's it. And that's assuming they don't get out earlier through flight or escape (ok to be fair, those escapes were in Spain's neighbors, the UK and France), exchanged in a hostage deal, or set free on parole. One of the reasons that the defendants were charged with so many individual crimes was specifically to make it more difficult to parole them later. The very fact that prosecutors would have to manipulate the system to prevent parole for these mass-murderers is further evidence that Spain's legal system is simply not equipped to handle crimes of this magnitude.

There was also evidence of this during the prosecution of Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas (aka Abu Dahdah), an Al Qaeda member in Spain who funneled money to terror groups across the globe and helped mastermind the Sep 11 attacks. He was convicted of belonging to a terror organization, but the conviction for involvement in 9/11 was overturned by Spain's highest court for lack of evidence. He was also accused of helping plan the Madrid bombings from prison. But in all, he will only serve 12 years (if even that much).

With an ever-increasing population (mostly foreign-born), it would be a good idea for Spain to rethink its terrorism laws. You don't need to have secret tribunals in far off countries to do this. Some common sense changes, such as eliminating the rule on concurrent sentences would go a long way. Although Spain no longer supports the war in Iraq, they still support operations in Afghanistan, they are still among the conquests that Osama Bin Laden has repeatedly called for (Bin Laden refers to the loss of Moorish Spain as "the tragedy of Andalucia", and Zawrahiri has called for "jihad...from Spain to Iraq"), and they still face attacks from Basque separatists. The problem is not going to go away soon.

UPDATE 01/11/2007 06:02:00 PM:
I'm not the only one who thinks the verdicts were a little on the light side. "Madrid victims attack 'leniency'" was a headline in BBC News today.

Some were upset by the number of guilty verdicts:

Maria Jose Gutierrez, a Spaniard who lost her sister in the bombings, said: "There are far too few guilty verdicts for such a horrible crime."

That's a fair point, although it should be noted that in addition to the 21 guilty verdicts, seven people blew themselves up during a police raid in April 2004.

Some, like me, think the sentences were simply far too short. Isabel Presa, who lost her son, said:

"It has destroyed my life, it has condemned me and my husband to a life sentence-and these people get off scot free, some already on the street and others to 12 years, Mrs Presa said. "I have waited three years, and now? Now what?"

"Isaac" from Ohio, USA, left this comment on the BBC's "Have your say":

This amounts to a farce and they should be dealt the same blow that they served the 191 people on those trains. Blown up with bags full of expolsives and nails.

Interested in reading more? Click on any label below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed