Q&A: Farhad Shamo Roto on Latest Court Cases for Ezidi Genocide Survivors in Europe
Farhad Shamo Roto is director of Voice of Ezidis and a former Refugees International fellow. During the week of March 16, Farhad attended two trials – one in the Netherlands and one in France – regarding accountability for the Ezidi genocide and asylum for Ezidi genocide survivors in Europe.
The Dutch case challenges a change in asylum policy that leaves Ezidis in the Netherlands in legal limbo and at risk of deportation to Iraq, while the trial in France is the first prosecution of a French citizen for involvement in genocide. Together, these cases reveal the need for improved European approaches to the Ezidi genocide that will allow survivors to unite with relatives and rebuild their lives, both in Europe and in Iraq.
Refugees International’s Yael Schacher sat down to discuss the cases and their implications with Farhad.
Yael: What happened in court in the Hague on March 17?
Farhad: In 2024, the Netherlands authorities decided to stop considering Ezidis a group at risk for the purposes of Dutch asylum procedures, which led to an increase in rejection of asylum claims by individual Ezidis, several of whom challenged that rejection at the high court in the Hague. I have been following these cases, supporting lawyers for Ezidis in the Netherlands, and informing the Dutch Refugee Council about conditions in Iraq that make it unsafe for Ezidis to be deported.
The main question before the court was: is the Kurdistan region, where Ezidis have been living in displaced persons camps for over a decade, safe for Ezidi return? And what of the Ezidis who came to the Netherlands from Shingal, having fled the genocide there?
The Dutch government argued that the camps in Kurdistan should be considered permanent housing for Ezidis, who should become people of Kurdistan and not return to their homeland in Shingal. This has been Dutch policy – as is clear from their aid to the camps – for a decade too. But it has also been the policy of the Kurdistan authorities, who make it difficult for Ezidis to leave the camps to go back to farm and rebuild their homes in Shingal. Most Ezidis do not trust the Kurdistan authorities, see them as complicit in the genocide, and – since then – as using Ezidis to gain the aid and support of western governments while preventing Ezidis from gaining autonomy in their homeland.
At the trial, lawyers for Ezidis and the UNHCR insisted that the camps were not homes for Ezidis, and that Ezidis should not be returned there from the Netherlands by force. When a judge asked the lawyers for the Dutch government what had changed for Ezidis, so that they are no longer considered an at risk group, the government had no response.
A judge also asked whether Shingal was safe and whether the Dutch government knew how many Ezidis in the Netherlands had come directly from Shingal, rather than Kurdistan. Again, the Dutch government had no response. Its position is to argue it could send all Ezidis to the camps in Kurdistan. A judge also asked: assuming they came from Kurdistan, if it is safe there, why did they leave? Again, no answer from the Dutch government.
A representative for UNHCR explained that if the genocide was only committed by ISIS, people would not try to leave and cross borders. It is also true that so many Ezidis have family and relatives who are living in Europe and have gained refuge there. The pull of family unity is strong, especially among survivors of a genocide; family unification is key to recovery and rebuilding among Ezidi survivors.
The fact is, it is Dutch immigration policy that has changed – not conditions for Ezidis in Iraq. If justice is stronger than politics at the Hague, I am hopeful that this court case will lead to change in policy.
Yael: What was the trial about in France?
Farhad: The case involved a French person, a leader of an ISIS group in Syria, who enslaved, sold, and raped Ezidi women. Significantly, the perpetuator of these horrific crimes was not in the courtroom – but two of his victims were, and gave emotional and compelling testimony about what they suffered. One woman spoke of how she was sold several times, and, though she lives in Canada, remains separated from some relatives who were not killed or lost.
The conviction in this case is so important as it marked the first time a French court recognized French participation in the ISIS genocide against the Ezidi community and the first time a French national was convicted of genocide. But a true reckonning with the Ezidi genocide needs to center the needs of survivors – including in France.
Ezidi survivors have been waiting, not just for the perpetuators of genocide to be held accountable – or to find the more than 2,000 children and women who remain missing – or to give a dignified burial to loved ones found in over 90 discovered mass graves. Survivors are also waiting to be given a chance at dignity, support, and stability in France.
France is rejecting Ezidi asylum seekers and limiting family unification. We hope that justice for Ezidis in France will not be only symbolic, but will lead to meaningful actions for the Ezidi survivors in France.
I believe true justice requires not only punishing perpetrators but ensuring survivors are not forgotten or sent back into danger. They should be provided with psychological services and given the ability to unite with families in France. True recognition of genocide meets survivors where they are – including supporting them to rebuild their lives here in France.
Yael: Why are these trials important, and how do they connect to your ongoing advocacy for Ezidis?
Farhad: First, they give a platform to survivors. Those who testified in the Dutch case emphasized rebuilding their lives in the Netherlands and that Kurdistan is not their home. A teenager whose parents were killed during the genocide spoke in perfect Dutch about attending school in the Netherlands; a man from Shingal testified that Ezidis are considered infidels in Kurdistan. The ongoing consequences of the genocide are palpable in Iraq – camps, insecurity, mass graves – and security and the guarantee of support for survivors in Europe is part of justice, resolution, and recovery from genocide.
The response to the Ezidi genocide today needs to involve and meet the needs of survivors both in Europe and in Iraq. To understand what needs to happen, it is crucial to give a platform to Ezdi people to tell their stories and to listen to what they say are the solutions. Ezidis are not asking for money for camps in Kurdistan so that they can be deported there from Europe. Ezidis want an international commission and self governance in Shingal. We have put together a petition that has widespread support from the Ezidi community, for precisely this.