Key Takeaways
- Jamal Taan Borhot, a 35-year-old Calgary man, has been found guilty of three terrorism-related offences after spending 11 months in Syria between 2013 and 2014.
- Borhot was convicted of training with and fighting for ISIS, taking on a role as a commander, creating videos for the group, and attempting to recruit others to join.
- The conviction was based on evidence including travel documents, Facebook messages, and intercepted phone calls, which showed Borhot’s involvement with ISIS and his promotion of terrorist beliefs.
- Borhot’s cousin, Hussein Borhot, pleaded guilty to similar offences in 2022 and was sentenced to 12 years in prison.
- A sentencing hearing for Jamal Borhot will take place at a later date.
Introduction to the Case
A Calgary man, Jamal Taan Borhot, has been found guilty of terrorism offences after a judge ruled that the evidence showed he was fighting for ISIS. Borhot, 35, was convicted of three terrorism-related offences after spending 11 months in Syria between May 2013 and April 2014. The verdict was delivered by Court of King’s Bench Justice Corina Dario, who revoked Borhot’s bail and ordered him to be taken into custody. A sentencing hearing will take place at a later date.
Background and Delays
Borhot’s case has been ongoing for several years, with his cousin Hussein Borhot also charged by the RCMP in 2020. Hussein pleaded guilty to similar offences in 2022 and was handed a 12-year sentence. Jamal’s case encountered several delays, including changes in defence counsel and federal court proceedings. These proceedings dealt with issues of whether potentially sensitive disclosure could be provided to Borhot and his lawyer, and had to be concluded before the trial could begin. Last year, Dario rejected a defence application to have the charges stayed due to delays in the case.
Evidence and Verdict
In reaching her verdict, Dario relied on a range of evidence, including travel documents, Facebook messages sent by Jamal, and intercepted phone calls he had with family members and a friend. Prosecutors Kent Brown and Domenic Puglia presented evidence that showed Borhot trained with and fought for ISIS, took on a role as a commander for the group, created videos for the benefit of ISIS, and attempted to recruit others to join. The Crown also relied on Facebook messages Borhot sent to three men, which prosecutors say promoted ISIS in an attempt to get the men to join him in fighting in Syria. Dario noted that Borhot made comments "filled with hatred toward non-Muslims" and "about killing those who did not convert to Islam."
Defence Argument
Defence lawyer Pawel Milczarek argued that the Crown failed to prove its case, submitting that the Crown had not proven which group, if any, Borhot had joined. Milczarek also argued that it is "reasonably possible" that the Facebook messages and intercepted phone calls made by Borhot were "a fabrication created to gain status within his community of peers and family." However, Dario rejected this argument, stating that the evidence showed Borhot held terrorist beliefs and was prepared to both kill and die for those beliefs.
Conclusion and Next Steps
The conviction of Jamal Taan Borhot is a significant development in the case, and a sentencing hearing will take place at a later date. The case highlights the importance of investigating and prosecuting terrorism-related offences, and the need for individuals to be held accountable for their actions. The fact that Borhot’s cousin, Hussein, pleaded guilty to similar offences and was sentenced to 12 years in prison suggests that the courts take these types of offences very seriously. As the case moves forward, it will be important to consider the implications of Borhot’s conviction and the potential consequences for his future.