The substantive hearing took place on 27 March 2026 at the District Court of Rotterdam. The prosecution demanded a seven-year custodial sentence for the 49-year-old suspect.

The prosecution outlined how, in October 2014, the suspect travelled with her two minor children from the Netherlands to Syria via Turkey, falsely representing the trip to the children’s father as a holiday. Shortly after arrival, she married an IS fighter and settled with her children in IS-controlled territory. According to the prosecution, this exposed both children to the realities of life under IS. As the prosecutors stated before the Rotterdam court:

“Once in Syria, the suspect exposed her children to the atrocities of this terrorist organisation, by marrying an IS fighter and settling together with her partner and children in an area controlled by IS. This led to her daughter subsequently ending up, at a very young age, in two successive marriages to IS fighters, and to her minor son joining IS. In this way, her children were effectively robbed of a significant part of their childhood. The effects of growing up in a war zone, marked by fear and uncertainty, are profound and lasting for children. In addition to adequate care, they lacked education, prospects for the future, and above all a sense of safety.”

The prosecution argued that the son, then 14 years old upon arrival in Syria, participated in an IS training camp and became a member of IS military police in Raqqa, where he was placed on the IS payroll. He was killed in 2017, at the age of 15, during a bombardment while serving with an IS combat unit.

The central charge in terms of gravity, according to the prosecution, is complicity in the use of a child soldier — a war crime under international law. Additional charges include participation in a terrorist organisation, endangering the welfare of her children, and removing them from the custody of their father. The prosecution also emphasised the protections afforded to children in wartime under international treaties and the seriousness of this case.

“This is, in the view of the prosecution, also the crux when it comes to the gravity of this case. Through her actions, the suspect violated, in an extremely serious manner, the duty of care she had as a mother towards her minor children. Instead of giving them the protection they were entitled to, she deliberately and knowingly took them to a war zone under the control of one of the most brutal regimes the world has seen in recent decades: ‘Islamic State’. There, the risks to their safety and development were enormous and life-threatening.”

The prosecution noted that the harm caused extended beyond the children to other family members, including their father. On the basis of the gravity of all charges, the prosecution demanded a custodial sentence of seven years.

The suspect exercised her right to remain silent throughout the proceedings.

A pro forma session was held on June 5, 2025, to assess the ongoing criminal proceedings against the suspect, a Dutch citizen detained on charges related to her alleged involvement with ISIS and suspected international crimes. The hearing focused on reviewing developments in the investigation, addressing procedural motions, and evaluating the necessity of continued detention.

The prosecution reported the expansion of the case file, which now exceeds 2000 pages, following the submission of new evidence. This includes interviews with members of her family and additional digital forensic material. Certain investigative components remain pending, notably expert reports concerning the Middle East context and translations of key audio recordings.

The prosecution also informed the court of continuing international cooperation, particularly with Danish and British authorities. In this context, a key witness has expressed initial willingness to testify, pending further coordination.

The defense submitted several motions during the session. These included requests to hear the suspects mother and sister directly before a judge, to verify the accuracy of translated Arabic documents, and to initiate a reclassification report evaluating her risk of reoffending. The defense also challenged the reliability of certain intelligence sources, including Dutch intelligence (TCI).

The court ruled that the requested witnesses must first be interviewed by the police before any judicial hearing. It upheld the inclusion of Arabic-language source documents in the case file and rejected the motion for a formal review of Dutch intelligence reliability. The request for a reclassification report was likewise denied.

The court emphasized the seriousness of the charges and reaffirmed the legal grounds for the suspect’s continued pretrial detention, finding no sufficient basis for release at this stage. The matter was referred back to the examining magistrate for further investigative steps.

A follow-up pro forma hearing is scheduled for August 27, 2025, while a substantive hearing has been provisionally set for early 2026.

The session held on March 26, 2025, concerning the female suspect, was focused on reviewing the status of her criminal case and discussing her ongoing detention.

The suspect is a Dutch citizen, who has been detained for over ten months while facing charges linked to her involvement with ISIS. During the session, the court assessed various aspects of the ongoing investigation and legal proceedings. The judge clarified the purpose of the session as a review of the case’s progress, confirming that the file now comprises 1831 pages of documentation. The session also included discussions on the status of key investigative actions, including the examination of her digital presence, particularly her Facebook account, which has yielded crucial evidence. Additional international cooperation was noted, with witnesses in Denmark and a potential testimony from England, whose cooperation is awaited. Furthermore, experts were consulted regarding ideological factors, such as the concept of martyrdom, as part of the case’s progression.

The defense counsel for the suspect formally requested the suspension of her client’s provisional detention due to her deteriorating health and familial circumstances. They argued that her chronic medical conditions, which have worsened during her detention, require specialist treatment unavailable in the detention facility. Additionally, her family is facing severe health crises, which the Defense counsel presented as grounds for her release on the condition that she resides with her ill mother.

The prosecution, however, opposed this request, arguing that the investigation is ongoing, with several key aspects still requiring attention. The prosecution emphasized the severity of the charges against the suspect, particularly the allegation involving child fatalities, and stressed the importance of maintaining detention for public safety and judicial integrity. The prosecution also defended the adequacy of medical care available to the suspect within the detention facility.

The court ultimately denied the suspension request, citing ongoing investigative needs, the seriousness of the charges, and public safety concerns. The judge emphasized that the suspect’s health could be managed through appropriate external medical intervention if deemed necessary. The case is scheduled to continue with a substantive hearing on June 5, 2025, with the possibility of further proceedings later in the year.