Investigators found bomb-making instructions on the phones of five men who were among seven arrested last month over suspicious jihadist social media activity, a court heard on Thursday.

They included pictures and diagrams explaining how a variety of bombs and explosives could be manufactured at home. 

The officers testified in the compilation of evidence against Ajil Al Muhsen, 21, Adnan Maashi, 21, Yazan Abduklaziz, 26, Ahmed Kadas, 25, Khalil Al Mahmoud, 21, Ahmed Ahmed, 27 and Mohammed Mohammed, 24 , all Syrian nationals.

They stand accused of distributing material aimed at inciting terrorism, recruiting or encouraging third parties to carry out terrorist acts or planning to travel abroad as part of a terrorist plot. They have also been accused of receiving and providing training on the use of firearms and explosives, financing or organising overseas travel for terrorism-related training as well as spreading extremist material supporting terrorism.

All seven are pleading not guilty to the charges. 

The first witness described being tasked to monitor the social media accounts of the co-accused, which he was able to identify except one of them, Ajil Al Muhsen. 

Of the remaining six, the witness said, all but Mohammed had posted content related to terrorism on their public accounts. This included footage and pictures of Isis leaders and clergymen, videos of Al-Qaeda leaders and videos of what the witness identified as school children wearing bandanas stamped with the Isis flag. 

The accused wore Isis symbols

The witness also said that the co-accused had posted videos of themselves wearing distinctive rings that bore symbols related to Isis as well as footage in which a nasheed - an Islamic form of acapella song - that is frequently used by ISIS to promote acts of jihad was heard playing in the background. 

Prodding the witness, defence lawyer José Herrera asked whether he spoke or read Arabic or was an expert in international politics, to which the witness replied that he was not. 

Asking then how he was able to identify and translate the nasheed if he did not have a working knowledge of Arabic, the witness replied that he had used an online translation tool and then confirmed it with Europol officials for accuracy. The witness said he had also made use of identification materials available to law enforcement that work in counter-terrorism to identify the people and songs depicted in the photos and videos.

“So you used Google Translate,” Herrera rebuked. 

A second police witness who was tasked with examining the data found in the accused’s smartphone testified that several photos and videos related to ISIS were also found saved on the media folder of the phones, similar to the material that was previously described as being shared on the social media accounts of the five men. 

Several pictures on the phone showed instructions on how to make a variety of explosive devices, including car bombs and pipe bombs, with other images making reference to explosive devices used in other acts of terrorism such as the Oklahoma City bombing. 

Another video found on the phone, the witness said, featured Mohammad singing a nasheed that is associated with Isis because it calls on people to “sacrifice their soul” and is generally understood to encourage suicide attacks and is about fighters looking for martyrdom. 

The identity of the nasheed was also confirmed through Europol, he said. 

No bomb-making materials found

Herrera asked whether police raids had yielded the discovery of any bombs or explosive material in the possession of the co-accused, to which the witness replied that no explosives or material related to bomb-making had been found. 

“But the bombs these were describing could be made from materials found in homes very easily,” he said. 

“But did you find any of this material?” Herrera replied, to which the answer was again “no”. 

Asked by the prosecution to describe what the photos of bombs were about, the witness said that they were pictures with writing in Arabic which described how much material to use, how to connect the wiring, what burning materials to use as well as how to calculate the distance of a blast radius. Another image also contained detailed instructions on how to make a car bomb, he said. 

Herrera said the defence intends to file an application with the court seeking to expunge the two reports presented by today’s witnesses because it feels that these should not be admissible in court. 

Malta’s laws on terrorism, he continued, were transposed from a European directive that holds that in order to be found guilty of these charges, two key elements must be proven - that there is a specific intention to incite terrorism in the country and that the material in question has to have gravitas. 

“Let’s say I am a fan of Nazism and I quote Mein Kampf on social media, this is not enough evidence to say I am forming a cell to promote Nazism in the country,” Herrera said. 

“If I sympathise with certain movements and keep their flags and music, there is no gravitas, I am at best sympathising with a group that could be linked to terrorism,” he continued. 

“To sustain the crime, you have to have a specific intention.” 

Herrera continued that the defence believed the two documents presented to the court on Thursday are inadmissible because they are opinions and witnesses cannot testify to their opinion. When the court needs advice on a matter it must appoint an expert, he said. 

“The evidence we saw here today is from two members of the police force who have a bias towards the prosecution, translated a language they do not speak with Google Translate and made conclusions about who is and who isn’t a terrorist in this document and presented as fact,” Herrera said. 

In his rebuttal, prosecution lawyer Antoine Agius Bonnici said that the same directive quoted by the defence also holds that disseminating material that glorifies terrorism is still a crime in and of itself and said that the reports were part of the chain of evidence that shows a pattern in the kind of material the co-accused had been sharing showed the intention of a lead up to an attack. 

Magistrate Nadine Lia ruled that there was enough prima facie evidence to place the seven men under a bill of indictment. 

The case continues on June 22. 

Inspectors Jeffrey Cutajar and Jean Paul Attard prosecuted, assisted by AG lawyers Antoine Agius Bonnici, Francesco Refalo and Rebecca Spiteri.

Lawyers Jose Herrera, Alex Scerri Herrera, Matthew Xuereb, Alicia Borg and Robert Galea were defence counsel.