Paris, France | AFP | Tuesday 09/17/2024 – He will remain silent… at least “for today”. Jihad veteran Peter Cherif, on trial at the Paris Assize Court in particular for his role alongside one of the attackers of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in 2015, refused to speak in court on Tuesday.
This was the big unknown of this trial, which began on Monday: will he speak? will he not speak?
From the start of this second day of hearing, Peter Cherif sets the tone, while the president of the special assize court asks him to tell his life story.
“I do not wish to speak, Madam President,” he replied.
The day before, he had simply declared that he did not recognize the facts with which he is accused.
The 42-year-old jihadist is being tried by the specially composed assize court for criminal terrorist association between 2011 and 2018, the period of his presence in Yemen within Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), as well as for the kidnapping in an organized gang in 2011, for more than five months, of three French humanitarians.
But it is above all his potential involvement in the massacre committed in Paris in the offices of Charlie Hebdo by the brothers Chérif and Saïd Kouachi on January 7, 2015, which is at the heart of the trial.
The investigating judges believe that he “facilitated the integration into AQAP of one of the Kouachi brothers, most likely Chérif”, and that he had “knowledge” of “the mission” to carry out an attack in France entrusted to his childhood friend during a short stay in Yemen in the summer of 2011.
Heard in the fall of 2020 as a witness during the trial of the January 2015 attacks, committed in particular by the Kouachi brothers, he assured that he had “nothing to do” with these attacks and then remained silent.
However, the man has not always been mute. In February 2019, when she met him in detention, he was “quite talkative”, the personality investigator appointed by the justice system explained to the assize court.
He tells her about his childhood, the trauma caused by the death of his father when he was only 14, his “anger” towards his mother who wanted to prevent her from seeing him, his descent into delinquency until the age of 20.
Then “his need to get back on the right path”, his decision to join the army and his discouragement after an ankle injury during a parachute jump, then his conversion and radicalization in 2003, and finally his various journeys to Syria, Iraq, Yemen and then Djibouti.
– “No answer” –
But this Tuesday, the attitude is completely different. “What makes you not want to talk about your life today? Can we understand that?” the president of the assize court asks him.
“I do not wish to answer your question, Madam President,” replied the accused, dressed in a grey suit and black tie, his arms crossed and his gaze lowered.
The magistrate continues with the questions. “No answer,” he repeats.
Taking over, one of the two attorneys general tries to provoke a reaction by prodding him, but the accused retreats further into silence.
It is the turn of the lawyers for the civil parties.
“What surprises me is that throughout the case, you have constantly stated your desire for justice,” observes Richard Malka, Charlie Hebdo’s lawyer. “Can we claim to seek justice when we refuse to participate in it?”
“That’s a good question,” says Peter Cherif, without saying more.
Referring to the civil parties present in the room, Mr Malka asks: “Would it not be respectful to answer the questions put to you?”
The accused remains silent. But before the president can declare the hearing suspended, he suddenly speaks.
“I would like to apologise from now on if my attitude towards the civil parties has caused frustration,” he said, explaining that he was not able to speak “in front of such a large audience” after having spent six years in solitary confinement in detention.
“If there are intelligent questions that aim to calm the debate, perhaps I will answer them. In any case, for today, I will not answer your questions,” he concluded.
