THE INTERNATIONAL Criminal Court at The Hague has found a Muslim radical guilty of committing a war crime by overseeing the destruction of historic mausoleums in the Malian city of Timbuktu, sentencing him to nine years in prison.
Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, a former teacher, had pleaded guilty and expressed remorse for his role in overseeing the destruction of nine mausoleums and a mosque door in June and July 2012.
His trial, which opened on August 22, was a landmark for the court, which has struggled to bring suspects to justice since its establishment in 2002.
It was the tribunal's first conviction for destruction of religious buildings or historic monuments, and the first guilty verdict delivered against a Muslim extremist.
Al-Qaida-linked rebels occupied the Saharan city of Timbuktu in 2012 and enforced a strict interpretation of Islamic law, which included the destruction of the historic mud-brick tombs which they considered to be idolatrous.
Al Mahdi was the leader of one of the "morality brigades" set up by Timbuktu's new rulers.
Prosecutors said Al Mahdi was a member of Ansar Eddine, an Islamic extremist group with links to al-Qaida which held power in northern Mali in 2012. The militants were driven out after nearly a year by French forces, who arrested Al Mahdi in 2014 in neighbouring Niger.
Clad in a grey suit and striped purple tie, the defendant said nothing after the verdict and sentencing.
Earlier in the trial, Al Mahdi urged Muslims around the world not to commit acts similar to those he had admitted.
"They are not going to lead to any good for humanity," he said.
Al Mahdi had faced a maximum sentence of 30 years' imprisonment for the destruction of the World Heritage-listed sites.
But presiding judge Raul Pangalangan said numerous factors argued for a lesser prison term, including Al Mahdi's initial reluctance to raze the historic buildings and what the judge called his apparently sincere admission of guilt.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here