A woman charged with remaining in the terrorist declared state of Syria has avoided conviction.
Mariam Raad, 32, of Young, had her charge conditionally discharged when she appeared in Goulburn Local Court on Wednesday, June 12.
She was charged in January, 2023 with one count of entering/remaining in a declared area. In documents tendered to the court, police alleged the Australian citizen entered Al-Raqqa state, an area controlled by terrorist group, ISIS, in 2014 and remained there until March, 2016.
Raad pleaded guilty to the offence in May.
However on Wednesday, Magistrate Geraldine Beattie said there was no evidence that Raad had engaged in hostilities and accepted defence arguments that her husband, the late ISIS fighter, Muhammad Zahab, had exercised "coercive control" over her to the point of monitoring text messages.
The court heard Raad twice attempted to travel to Syria. Crown prosecutor, Sam Duggan said she succeeded on the second attempt via Turkey in 2014 with her two children, aged two and three. Al Raqqa was declared a terrorist state in December, 2014, by which time Raad was living there.
Magistrate Beattie said while Raad's attempts reflected a desire to enter Syria there was no "premeditation" to stay there or engage in hostile activities.
"It is not a terrorism offence (to remain in the declared area), as the Crown has made clear. It is more important to consider the conduct," Magistrate Beattie said.
Raad's barrister, Rose Khalilizadeh, said statements in the agreed facts should be viewed in context. She said while the accused had told her family she wouldn't leave Islamic State and had spoken favourably of it, Raad was a "vulnerable woman" living in a patriarchal culture and in a coercive control relationship with her husband.
"It needs to be viewed in the context of what the psychologist has described as a level of control that's her husband had over her ... She would not question him," Ms Khalilizadeh said.
She described her client as vulnerable and a woman who had married Zahab "straight out of school," at age 18.
She referred to a psychologist's report which concluded Raad was "very likely" suffering complex PTSD symptoms."
The court hear Raad had been seeing a psychologist since early 2023.
Ms Khalilizadeh argued there was no need for deterrence because there was "no premeditation or planning" involved and Raad had since engaged in integrated support program targeted at people who had returned from declared areas.
Ms Khalilizadeh told the court her client had already endured four years of "inhumane conditions" in a displaced persons camp after surrendering to Islamic State, which she described as "a significant and compelling factor in this case."
However Mr Duggan said agreed facts stated that Raad knew she was living in a place that was considered dangerous and she had followed the progress of Islamic State hostilities.
Mr Duggan also argued Raad had spoken "favourably" about Islamic State in text messages.
He said the offence was introduced to deter people from putting themselves at risk.
"Not only did she do that but she also put her children at risk."
The court heard Raad had another child while in Syria. She was repatriated to Australia in November, 2022.
Magistrate Beattie said while Raad had placed her children at risk, messages to her father that she could not "leave the land of the caliphate" were ambiguous. She said this could be interpreted as she was "unable to leave."
"She was also in a foreign country, in a remote area, he (Zahab) was monitoring and controlling her communications and she was looking after three children in a war zone," Magistrate Beattie said.
"It raises the question whether she could have left if she wanted. I can't find she wanted to remain."
Magistrate Beattie also considered Raad's guilty plea, her expressions of "guilt and shame," her participation in integration programs, cooperation with the police investigation, the "significant trauma" she'd suffered and ongoing depression and anxiety" and her continued counselling.
She described the offence as having "low objective seriousness".
"My impression is that she was immature and blindly followed her partner in the context of a coercive control relationship. She has demonstrated genuine remorse," Magistrate Beattie said.
She discharged the matter, without conviction, under the Commonwealth Crimes Act. However the Magistrate imposed a 25-month good behaviour bond.
Raad must also continue her participation in the integrated support program, continue to see a psychologist and accept the supervision of Probation and Parole.
