It was a warm morning, and a long line stretched down the steps outside Birmingham Crown Court. Across the road, protestors chanted: “Majid, we are proud of you.” Today, at the end of a two-week trial in which Majid Novsarka faces up to 14 years in prison for terrorism charges based on a series of social media posts, it was the prosecution’s turn to cross-examine the defendant.
Novsarka was already on stand when the jury entered, a court officer with handcuffs on her belt sitting a short distance behind him. Novsarka is not accused of violence, or even of providing material support to a proscribed organisation. Rather, the claim is that during the Gaza genocide, Novsarka’s online posts praising the Palestinian “resistance” were a coded invitation to others to support Hamas, proscribed in the UK its entirety by then Conservative Home Secretary Priti Patel in 2021.
Prosecution barrister Tom Williams got straight to the point, beginning with private messages the police had obtained from Freeman’s phone using Cellebrite software. Notably, the messages are from before Patel’s proscription of Hamas’ political wing. “You were a supporter back then, weren’t you?” Williams asked.
“No”, Novsarka replied.
“And you’re still a supporter now, aren’t you?” Williams continued.
“No”, Novsarka repeated.
“Where do you differ then? Williams asked.
“I agree with them on certain points, such as resisting against the genocide,” Novsarka replied. “I disagree, for example, with innocent civilians being harmed under any circumstances.”
The prosecution referred to a poem Novsarka had reposted: “Everyone has a bullet or a gun in their hand.”
“You think people should take action after watching your videos. Do you agree with that principle?” the prosecutor asked.
“Yes, and I wanted to educate people”, Novsarka replied.
“And your phone was your gun?” the prosecutor asked.
“Yes, to amplify the voices of the Palestinians”, Novsarka replied.
The prosecution turned their attention to another private message recovered from Novsarka’s phone, in which he told friends: “We have a duty to humanise and glorify the resistance.”
“Were posting videos a part of that?” Williams asked.
“No. I was documenting the fact that there was still a fightback, that the Palestinians were still surviving”, Freeman replied. “This was about explaining to the public: no-one is coming to save the Palestinians. World leaders had openly said at the time: ‘We know what is happening, but we are not going to call for a ceasefire.’”
Williams then asked why the defendant had posted under the pseudonym “Majid Freeman” rather than his full name, Majid Novsarka.
“I receive so many death threats from Zionists for speaking out for Palestinians, and that’s why so many people don’t!” Freeman replied. “I wanted to protect my family.”
Just before midday, the jury were excused for a short break. One observer in the public gallery commented that the prosecution barrister was becoming “visibly frustrated”.
When the trial resumed, more social media posts were presented on the jurors’ screens. When the prosecution reached row 59 of the “timeline”, Novsarka addressed the jury directly. “This is a perfect example of the point I’m trying to make. Row 58 shows a video I shared from Al Quds Brigades [the armed wing of Fatah]. Row 59 shows a video shared from Al Qassam Brigades [the armed wing of Hamas]. If the UN had intervened, I would have been sharing their videos too!
In all of my posts, I used the hashtag ‘#gazaresists’, not ‘Hamas resists’.”
The prosecutor asked about comments on some of Novsarka’s Instagram posts which praised Hamas specifically. “Most come from countries where Hamas is not a proscribed organisation”, Novsarka replied.
Novsarka picked up the evidence bundle and again addressed the jury directly. “Between rows 108 and 109, there may have been up to 50 posts showing atrocities [that are not included here].
We have to show the whole picture. We can’t just show Palestinians dying non-stop. They are also able to fight back.”
When the prosecution finished their cross-examination at 3.15pm, defence barrister Hossein Zahir KC told the judge that he would be brief in his follow-up.
“Do you use the red triangle emoji to represent Hamas?” he asked.
“No”, Novsarka replied.
“Were you using red triangles to invite support for Hamas?” Zahir asked.
“No”, Novsarka replied.
“In supporting ‘the resistance’, were you inviting support for Hamas as an organisation?” Zahir asked.
“No”, Novsarka replied.
“That’s all my questions, Your Honour”, Zahir said.
Judge Andrew Smith KC turned to address the jury. On Tuesday morning, he explained, both sides will give their closing speeches. Then, they would be invited to begin their deliberations.
“Imagine if we didn’t have juries”, an observer in the public gallery noted.
Published in the Canary.