‘In my religion it is forbidden to bear false witness’



Abuzid Ebarak (left) is the victim of an attempted murder by a gang of Golden Dawn fascists in Athens four years ago. He is stood outside the ongoing trial of Golden Dawn with Magda Fyssa, the mother of Pavlos Fyssas, who was murdered by the fascists three years ago this weekend. 

All except the fascist defendants and their lawyers were left stunned today, 13 September 2016, at the trial of Golden Dawn by the testimony of Abu Hamad Sa’ad.

With great emotional power and analytical detail he described the raid by over a dozen Golden Dawn members in June 2012 on the house he shared with a group of other Egyptians, including Abuzid Ebarak, who was almost killed in the attack.

Yesterday, the lawyers of the 68 Golden Dawn defendants, many paid out of the Greek state budget as “technical staff” to the fascist parliamentary fraction, sought to belittle and abuse Abuzid in the witness box.

Today a further witness to the truth of what happened that night four years ago left them with very little to say and with the court less tolerant of their theatrics.

Abu Hamad Sa’ad recalled with compelling accuracy the minute by minute unfolding of the attack which nearly killed his friend.

It began with the Golden Dawn gang trying to smash down the front door of their house: “Open up, assholes. We are here to teach you what Golden Dawn is.”

Abu Hamad lives and works legally in Greece. “I have no problems with people here,” he told the president of the court – as Abuzid had also repeatedly told the trial in his testimony.

He was adamant that he could recognise where the attack that night came from and the affiliation of the men who perpetrated it.

He paused. Then words punctured the silence: “In my religion it is a very bad thing to accuse someone falsely.” The court was reminded that he had taken his oath to tell the truth upon the Koran.

The words are, of course, the eighth (or sometimes numbered ninth) commandment received according to the Book of Exodos by Moses – the prophet Musa in Islam, which shares that ancient Biblical scripture with Christianity and Judaism.

Abu Hamad continued: “We had to struggle to survive in Greece. We worked, We came to Greece for a better life. I sell a kilo of fish, if someone wants to buy it. If not, I don’t sell anything.”

Those words – voiced plainly and elegantly in Greek – are ones which many people in this country wracked by austerity understand all too well, however long they or their forebears have lived here.

He described how after the attackers fled he found his friend Abuzid, who had been sleeping outside on the terrace. His face and mouth were bloodied and swollen. His jaw twisted. He could not speak. Only gasps.

“I came to Greece alone,” Abu Hamad said, answering the presiding judge’s questions. “My big brother Ahmed had already been here for two years.

“We became fishermen on a boat and lived together. My other brother Mohammed came a couple of months after me. I worked for six months in the construction industry, then other jobs, and now we are fishermen.”

He knew Abuzid from Egypt, as their homes there were but two kilometres apart. He and his brothers assisted Abuzid to find work. They helped him out, though Abuzid protested any generosity.

As his testimony continued a matter of fact story took shape. Men of working age moving to a foreign land to try to make a life for themselves and for their families. Men moving first, perhaps women later – if a livelihood could be assured.

It is the story of the families of almost every Greek in the world, whether in Chicago, Toronto, Melbourne, London, or Munich.

And Abu Hamad’s and Abuzid’s parents and relatives worried about the dangers that might befall the migrants in a strange land.

In just the same way half a century ago, Greek parents fretted over the fate of their sons who had gone to work in the car factories of Germany or the building sites of Australia – from there to send home remittances: one wage packet in Stuttgart sustaining an extended family in Salonika.

Not just Greeks. And not just then. This is the condition today of large numbers of working people the world over.

Abu Hamad: “On the day of the attack we woke up at dawn to open the shop. I fell asleep at ten or ten thirty at night. The work is very tiring.

“Apart from my siblings, there were Ahmed’s two children in the house, aged 15 and 17.

“Suddenly the whole house shook, the door and the window. I heard my brother Ahmed cursing someone and there were men shouting through the door and the window. They smashed them with sticks and iron bars.

“We managed to keep the shutters of the windows closed and avoided being hit.” The court has already heard how the Golden Dawn gang had gone round to the terrace, where Abuzid was sleeping, to attack him.

Abu Hamad continued: “The young children hid under the beds.

“I sensed first there were about five or six people outside. Eventually I realised it was about a dozen.”

The Egyptian fisherman called out for the neighbours to help as the glass to the windows and door was smashed. Abu Hamad was clear who was attacking. “I had heard of Golden Dawn and my brother had seen these people in the neighbourhood. We were told that they can harm you.”

Costas and another neighbour answered the alarm, but arrived just as the attackers were fleeing on motorbikes. They were all clad in black. About half a dozen of them were armed with staves and bars.

The assault took place in minutes – military precision, you might say. Costas helped to summon the police and ambulance service.

Abu Hamad had seen the face of just one of the assailants. Unlike two other witnesses who will give evidence, he has never claimed to be sure of identifying by sight any of the attackers.

Could he identify them now in the court room? Without hesitation: “I must say that I cannot be sure. In my religion it is forbidden to accuse someone without being sure.”

With equal honesty, he described how Golden Dawn had driven past the house a dozen times before, looking threatening, and how he went that night with Abuzid to one hospital and then to another – fearful that he might die.

Lawyers for Golden Dawn resumed the contemptuous line of questioning that they hurled at the principal victim of this crime, Abuzid, yesterday.

They accused Abu Hamad of lying and that the whole incident was a result of a fight between “compatriots” – foreigners from the same region abroad and falling out over some matter or another.

That was the theory of the German police and internal intelligence in the case of the murder of nine Turkish and Kurdish men and one Greek between 2000 and 2007. They said, and worked on the basis, that the killings were gang- and drug-related. The murders turned out to be the work of a Nazi terror cell – the National-Socialist Underground – which is now the subject of a trial in Germany.

Once again came the accusation that the Egyptian fishermen were “working illegally”, here “to get something “, perhaps “paid” by a sinister force. And again came the despicable questioning of why these men from another country “increased the size of their families” when they were so poor.

Golden Dawn is not on trial for its ideology. What it says is of relevance to this process only in so far as it illustrates the criminal charge laid against it under Article 187 of the Greek penal code.

It is criminal actions – felonies, serious crimes, including murder and attempted murder – that are being tried along with the charge that those flow from the existence of a command-structure criminal organisation: a mafia of the violent and racist right.

But the well paid lawyers of Golden Dawn and the fascist criminal organisation itself are throwing another question into the scales as they plead their defence. It is the very idea that newcomers to the European continent are entitled to the protections of citizens who have been here longer.

They are laying the doctrine of racism and xenophobia before the court and, more widely, issuing that as an appeal to European opinion in their defence.

The judicial arm of the Greek state will have to decide how to respond to that question in its verdict in over a year’s time.

The more important verdict upon that question is the one that must be delivered now – and by the peoples of Europe and beyond.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s