Strengthening accountability for international crimes against the Yazidi community: The Hague Court of Appeal upholds the conviction of Hasna A
On 25 March 2026, the Court of Appeal in The Hague upheld the conviction of Hasna A., a 33-year-old Dutch national from Hengelo with links to the so-called Islamic State (ISIS), for her involvement in various offences, including slavery as a crime against humanity against a Yazidi woman. This decision consolidates the fight against impunity for international crimes, reinforcing the role of national courts in addressing international crimes under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
This was the first case in the Netherlands to address crimes committed against the Yazidi community in a judicial setting, setting a key precedent in the field of international criminal justice. In this regard, the recent ruling not only reaffirms the individual criminal responsibility of Hasna A. for crimes committed outside the national territory, but also sends a strong message: states cannot become havens of impunity for those who have participated in mass atrocities, even more so when it comes to their own nationals.
The events form part of the context of the genocide perpetrated from 2014 onwards by the jihadist group ISIS against the Yazidi population in the territories it controlled in Syria and Iraq, characterised by mass executions, the forced displacement of millions of people, sexual violence and the systematic enslavement of more than 6,000 women and girls. These grave human rights violations were part of a systematic pattern of persecution, in which slavery—including domestic and sexual exploitation—became a central tool for the domination and destruction of the community. In this context, thousands of Yazidi women were captured, transported, sold and subjected to conditions of extreme violence and dehumanisation, acts recognised by various organisations as crimes against humanity.
In this context, Hasna A. travelled from Enschede to Syria in 2015 with her four-year-old son, settling in territory controlled by ISIS amidst the consolidation of the self-proclaimed “caliphate”. During her stay, she married an ISIS fighter, with whom she started a family, and lived for four years in various areas under the organisation’s control, integrating into its social and structural dynamics. She also lived for a period in a house where Z., a Yazidi woman subjected to conditions of slavery, was being held.
The proceedings in question were initiated following the repatriation of Hasna A. to the Netherlands in November 2022, from a detention camp in north-eastern Syria, where she had been held since 2019 alongside her children. This is because, in the case of the Netherlands, the exercise of universal jurisdiction is primarily regulated by the Wet Internationale Misdrijven (International Crimes Act) of 2003, adopted following the ratification of the Rome Statute, which empowers Dutch courts to investigate and try these crimes even when they have been committed outside its territory and by foreign nationals, and which is characterised by the regulation of a limited form of universal jurisdiction, since, in practice, the presence of the suspect on Dutch territory is required to initiate criminal proceedings.
Consequently, from that point onwards, the Dutch Public Prosecution Service — through its unit specialising in international crimes, which is responsible for activating this mechanism either ex officio or following complaints — opened an investigation based on testimonies from Yazidi survivors, documentary evidence and cooperation with international organisations. The suspect remained in pre-trial detention from the moment of her repatriation.
The Dutch Public Prosecution Service charged Hasna A. with multiple offences arising from her links to ISIS and her conduct whilst in territory controlled by the organisation. In particular, she was accused of participating in a terrorist organisation, of carrying out preparatory acts for terrorist offences, and of having endangered her son – a child diagnosed with autism – by moving him to and keeping him in a conflict zone, thereby preventing him from attending school. Furthermore, the prosecution focused prominently on the offence of slavery as a crime against humanity, arguing that the defendant had knowingly contributed to the exploitation of Yazidi women – identified in the proceedings as Z. and S. – whilst residing in Raqqa, the Syrian capital controlled by ISIS, between May and December 2015, and between April and August 2016, forcing them to perform domestic labour and care for her son, thereby benefiting from their situation of subjugation within the context of ISIS’s systematic attack against this community.
In this context, the main hearings of the first instance of this historic trial took place on 14, 16 and 17 October 2024 at the Schiphol Judicial Complex (JCS), before the District Court of The Hague. During the hearings, the court examined both the defendant’s involvement in the terrorist organisation ISIS and her conduct towards the Yazidi victims. In the proceedings, two women were recognised as victims: Z., whose situation led to the conviction for slavery, and S., who also alleged that she had been subjected to similar conditions of exploitation during her captivity under ISIS. The testimonies of both were relevant to reconstructing the context of systematic slavery, although the court considered that only in the case of Z. was there sufficient evidence to support a conviction.
In its judgment of 11 December 2024, the court found Hasna A. guilty of slavery as a crime against humanity; in this regard, it determined that the defendant knowingly contributed to the continuation of the slavery of a Yazidi woman – identified as Z. –– by allowing her enslavement to persist despite being fully aware of the atrocities committed against her and the Yazidi community in general by ISIS. She was also found guilty of participating in a terrorist organisation, preparatory acts for terrorist offences, and endangering her minor son by travelling to a war zone in Syria and exposing him to bombings and air strikes, which caused adverse physical and mental effects on the child. The sentence imposed was ten years’ imprisonment, two years longer than the sentence sought by the prosecution, reflecting the gravity of the offences and their link to a systematic attack against the Yazidi population.
Following the judgment handed down in December 2024, both the defence and the prosecution lodged appeals, thereby initiating the second instance before the Court of Appeal in The Hague. On the one hand, the defence challenged the sentence in its entirety, questioning the legal classification of the facts, in particular the existence of the crime of slavery as a crime against humanity, as well as the assessment of the evidence and the degree of the defendant’s involvement, requesting acquittal on all charges. On the other hand, the Prosecution appealed against certain aspects of the judgment, particularly regarding the determination of the sentence and the scope of criminal liability, arguing for a more severe response commensurate with the gravity of the facts. Furthermore, the civil parties also raised issues relating to the recognition of damages and reparations. This series of appeals led to the opening of the appeal proceedings, which began with preliminary hearings on 9 July and 20 August 2025, and subsequently continued with the appeal hearings on 9, 10 and 11 February 2026 before the Court of Appeal in The Hague.
In its recent judgment of 25 March 2026, the Court of Appeal found that the defendant, fully aware of the victim’s situation, profited from her forced labour, gave her instructions and treated her as if she were her property, thereby contributing to the perpetuation of the situation of slavery. This conduct by Hasna A. was considered part of ISIS’s systematic attack against the Yazidi population, which allowed the acts to be classified as a crime against humanity. In this regard, the ruling is particularly significant as it reinforces the idea that criminal liability is not limited to those who exercise absolute direct control, but also extends to those who, knowingly, participate in or benefit from systems of structured exploitation.
Consequently, the Court of Appeal upheld her liability as an accomplice to the crime of slavery, as well as for membership of a terrorist organisation, preparatory acts for terrorist offences, and for leaving her son in a defenceless situation by moving him to and keeping him in a conflict zone. The sentence imposed was nine years’ imprisonment, slightly lower than that of the first instance, taking into account the defendant’s personal circumstances.
One of the central elements of the trial was the testimony of Z., whose statement proved decisive in reconstructing the facts. Her participation—along with that of other survivors—highlights the crucial role of victims in this type of trial.
The court also expressly recognised the harm suffered by Z., awarding her compensation of €15,000. This recognition is significant: it reflects a shift in judicial practice towards more victim-centred approaches, where reparation is understood as an essential component of justice, going beyond the mere imposition of criminal penalties. The organisations involved in the proceedings also noted that the Office of the Prosecutor demonstrated consistent attention to the Yazidi community throughout these proceedings, a victim-centred approach that sets an important precedent for future cases.
In this regard, the proceedings also illustrate how national judicial systems can adapt to the evidential complexity of international crimes. The assessment of testimonies, the use of contextual evidence and the reconstruction of patterns of behaviour within organised structures such as ISIS proved to be essential elements in establishing the existence of a widespread or systematic attack against the civilian population.
From a gender perspective, the case is particularly significant. By recognising that the enslavement of Yazidi women cannot be understood as an isolated or incidental phenomenon, but rather as part of a deliberate policy of gender-based violence aimed at the domination, control and destruction of a specific community, it sets an important precedent for other cases currently being pursued regarding crimes suffered by the Yazidi community. In this regard, the judgment has helped to highlight these dynamics and reinforce the need to mainstream a gender perspective in the prosecution of international crimes. It has also highlighted how forms of violence against women in conflict contexts require interpretative frameworks that capture their structural nature, rather than merely their individual nature.
This case is also part of a broader trend towards the prosecution of crimes committed against the Yazidi community through universal jurisdiction in various European countries. In particular, its connection to the proceedings initiated in Paris in March 2026 before the Cour d’assises is significant, where French citizen Sabri Essid was tried—in absentia—for genocide and crimes against humanity committed against Yazidi women and children in Syria between 2014 and 2016, in what constitutes the first trial in France focused on these events. These proceedings – alongside others in Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden – reflect how national courts are taking on a central role in prosecuting ISIS crimes, contributing not only to individual accountability but also to the legal recognition of the Yazidi genocide, and highlighting the potential of universal jurisdiction in the fight against impunity.
Despite the progress represented by this decision, accountability for the crimes committed against the Yazidi community remains incomplete: thousands of women and girls are still missing, and numerous victims are still awaiting justice, truth and full reparation. In this context, the Hasna A. case takes on a significance that transcends the national sphere, not only because it sets a precedent for the use of universal jurisdiction by Dutch courts, but also because it reinforces the idea that justice can—and must—be delivered through multiple jurisdictions in the face of crimes of extreme gravity. Ultimately, the confirmation of this conviction represents a significant step in the fight against impunity for ISIS crimes, whilst reaffirming the central role of victims and contributing to the strengthening of more effective responses to sexual and gender-based violence in conflict contexts.
By Federica Carnevale, Project Manager at FIBGAR.
REFERENCES
JusticeInfo.net, Beyond the courts: making justice visible for the Yazidi community, 2026. Available at: https://www.justiceinfo.net/en/156024-beyond-the-courtroom-making-justice-visible-to-the-yazidi-community.html
NL Times, Hengelo woman sentenced to 10 years in prison for enslaving a Yazidi woman in Syria, 2024. Available at: https://nltimes.nl/2024/12/11/hengelo-woman-sentenced-10-years-prison-enslaving-yazidi-woman-syria
NL Times, Trial begins against Dutch woman accused of enslaving Yazidi women in the ISIS caliphate, 2024. Available at: https://nltimes.nl/2024/10/14/trial-starts-dutch-woman-accused-enslaving-yazidi-women-isis-caliphate
Nuhanovic Foundation, Litigation Support – Hasna A. Case. Available at: https://nuhanovicfoundation.org/case/hasna-a-case/
Nuhanovic Foundation, Court of Appeal upholds conviction in landmark Yazidi slavery case, 2026. Available at: https://nuhanovicfoundation.org/news/court-of-appeal-upholds-conviction-in-landmark-yazidi-slavery-case/
Nuhanovic Foundation, The Hasna A. Case: Frequently Asked Questions, 2024. Available at: https://nuhanovicfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/New-Revised-Hasna-A.-FAQ-Doc.pdf
Rechtspraak, Prison sentence for crimes committed in Syria, 2026. Available at: https://www.rechtspraak.nl/organisatie-en-contact/organisatie/gerechtshoven/gerechtshof-den-haag/nieuws/prison-sentence-for-crimes-committed-in-syria
