Canada professor convicted in absentia gets renewed attention from right over 1980 Paris attack

Until recently, Hassan Diab's life in Ottawa had begun to settle back into a quiet suburban routine: spending his days teaching sociology part time at Carleton University, taking his two youngest children to the park to play football, or going for an afternoon swim.
It had been well over a year since he was convicted in absentia for carrying out a deadly bomb attack on a Paris synagogue in 1980, and the media attention had largely quieted down. He was trying to move on with his life.
Diab, who is Lebanese Canadian, has consistently maintained his innocence, claiming he was in Beirut sitting university exams at the time of the bombing.
But in January, a new voice weighed into his case, returning it to the headlines. Elon Musk reposted an X post about Diab by Pierre Polievre, leader of the country's federal Conservative party. Musk added a remark: 'A mass murderer is living free as a professor in Canada?' More than 21 million people saw the post.
For 71-year-old Diab, whose story is the focus of a new Canadaland podcast series, the renewed attention from prominent rightwing figures has plunged his life back into a familiar turmoil.
With a general election which needs to be called before October, Diab fears that shifting politicians winds in Canada could lead to a new extradition fight.
'I just have to be careful. It's like you are living in constant fear. It's not easy, it's like waiting for a ghost to appear from somewhere.'
***
Aliza Shagrir, an Israeli film editor, was in Paris on holiday in October 1980, when she stopped at a grocery store on rue Copernic to buy figs.
Moments later, a blast ripped through the street. Shopfronts were blown out. Parked cars were reduced to twisted hunks of metal.
Ten kilograms of the explosive PETN had been hidden inside a motorbike parked outside a synagogue and timed to detonate at 6:30pm, when the congregation was due to be leaving. But services were running late, so the more than 300 worshippers were still inside when the bomb exploded. Shagrir was one of four passersby who were killed in the attack.
Her son, Oron Shagrir, said that the family never recovered from the loss. 'She was 42 when she was killed. She was beautiful, joyful, very opinionated. In some ways, she was the centre of the family.'
The blast shocked the country. It was the first deadly attack targeting French Jews since the second world war, and in the following days, thousands of Parisians marched in solidarity with the Jewish community.
French police gathered a limited set of clues: a handwriting sample from his hotel registration card, and a police sketch based on witness testimony.
Together with the type of explosive used and a German intelligence report, authorities concluded that the attack was committed by the PFLP-OS - a now defunct offshoot of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
But it wasn't until decades later, in 2007, after a new investigative judge in Paris named Marc Trévidic took over the case, that Diab became a focus of the investigation. His name appeared in an unsourced 1999 Israeli intelligence report, which included a list of people purportedly involved in the bombing.
Diab's lawyer, Don Bayne, has long argued that the intelligence used to identify him is unreliable, saying: 'It's unknown sources. Unknown circumstances. Who said what? When? Is this a human source? Is this just something some analyst made up? We have no idea.'
Trévidic obtained a photocopy of an old passport belonging to Diab, which contained stamps showing travel in and out of Europe around the dates of the attack. Finally, he found a 1988 police interrogation record, in which one of Diab's former university friends suggested that Diab was once involved with a political party linked to the PFLP.
Diab denies ever being involved with a political group. He says that he believes his passport was stolen in Beirut in 1980, and subsequently used by the bomber.
In 2008, Trévidic had completed his initial investigation and submitted an extradition request to the Canadian government.
Diab was getting ready to leave the house for his morning jog in November that year when police showed up. He was arrested and later released on bail.
As the case attracted increasing media attention, Ottawa citizens and human rights organisations grew alarmed at what they believed was insufficient evidence to justify Diab's extradition.
Bernie Farber, a Jewish community leader who had initially welcomed Diab's arrest, was following closely. 'It came to a point where I just couldn't believe that people didn't understand that this was not the guy,' he said.
In April 2012, Robert Maranger, the judge overseeing the extradition hearings, delivered his verdict. He described the French case as 'weak [and] replete with seemingly disconnected information'. But he was sufficiently persuaded by handwriting analysis gathered from five words written on the suspect's hotel registration card. Despite expert testimonies strongly criticising the analysis, Maranger granted the extradition.
Diab's appeals failed, and in November 2014, he was placed on an Air France flight bound for Paris, where he was met on the tarmac by French police and escorted to prison.
Eleven months into his detention, Diab received some welcome news; Trevidic's term as investigative judge had come to an end, and two new judges would be reinvestigating the case.
They interviewed Diab at length, and travelled to Lebanon to gather testimony from former university classmates, who said they remembered Diab sitting exams in Beirut the week of the bombing.
Eventually, the judges ruled that there was insufficient evidence to keep Diab detained, and ordered his release. After more than three years incarcerated in Paris without trial, he was free to return home to Canada.
Three days later, Diab was welcomed at Ottawa airport by supporters – and by his wife, Rania, and his two children – the youngest of whom he was meeting outside prison walls for the first time.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau later voiced his support, saying that 'what happened to Hassan Diab never should have happened', and promised a government inquiry into his extradition.
For Diab, the past decade had felt like a kafkaesque nightmare – and now it looked like it might finally be over.
But his relief was short-lived.
The French judges' decision was successfully appealed, and arrangements were made for a fresh trial in April 2023.
Diab was requested to attend in person, but without a new extradition order he was under no obligation to show up.
During the three-week Paris trial, state anti-terrorist prosecutors asked for a maximum prison sentence, saying there was 'no possible doubt' he was guilty. Diab's defence asked for him to be acquitted to 'avoid a judicial error'.
No new evidence was presented during the three-week trial, and the handwriting evidence was thrown out after it was determined to be inconclusive.
The only material evidence brought up in court was a set of fingerprints and a handprint believed to belong to the bomber. Neither was a match for Diab.
But the court dismissed alibis presented by Diab, saying their explanations about the passport being lost and his presence in Beirut at the time of the attack were 'variable' and 'not very credible'.
On 21 April 2023, Diab was found guilty in absentia, and sentenced to life in prison. A warrant was immediately issued for his arrest.
In the knowledge he could be arrested at any moment, Diab attempted to reintegrate back into his old life, living back at home with his family, and working as a part-time professor at Carleton University.
In late 2024, the Jewish advocacy group B'nai B'rith issued a statement calling for Carleton to end Diab's teaching contract, igniting a flurry of new interest in the case – particularly in the rightwing media.
Diab's sociology department chair said while Diab's current contract has ended, the department's relationship with him had not changed.
Diab says his lectures were temporarily relocated out of concern for student safety, and he received death threats to his work email.
For now, his life hangs in an anxious limbo. He's out of prison, but is followed by the constant dread that his government could accept another extradition request from France. 'That's the sword above your head, waiting to fall.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

26 minutes ago

• USA Today

Oil hits five-month high after US strikes key Iranian nuclear sites

SINGAPORE - Oil prices jumped on Monday, local time, to their highest since January as Washington's weekend move to join Israel in attacking Iran's nuclear facilities stoked supply worries. Brent crude futures rose $1.88 or 2.44% at $78.89 a barrel as of 1122 GMT. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude advanced $1.87 or 2.53% at $75.71. Both contracts jumped by more than 3% earlier in the session to $81.40 and $78.40, respectively, five-month highs, before giving up some gains. The rise in prices came after President Donald Trump said he had "obliterated" Iran's main nuclear sites in strikes over the weekend, joining an Israeli assault in an escalation of conflict in the Middle East as Tehran vowed to defend itself. Iran is OPEC's third-largest crude producer. Market participants expect further price gains amid mounting fears that an Iranian retaliation may include a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly a fifth of global crude supply flows. Iran's Press TV reported that the Iranian parliament approved a measure to close the strait. Iran has in the past threatened to close the strait but has never followed through on the move. "The risks of damage to oil infrastructure ... have multiplied," said Sparta Commodities senior analyst June Goh. Although there are alternative pipeline routes out of the region, there will still be crude volumes that cannot be fully exported out if the Strait of Hormuz becomes inaccessible. Shippers will increasingly stay out of the region, she added. Brent has risen 13% since the conflict began on June 13, while WTI has gained around 10%. The current geopolitical risk premium is unlikely to last without tangible supply disruptions, analysts said. Meanwhile, the unwinding of some of the long positions accumulated following a recent price rally could cap an upside to oil prices, Ole Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo Bank, wrote in a market commentary on Sunday. (Reporting by Siyi Liu in Singapore; Editing by Himani Sarkar)

UPI

an hour ago

• UPI

U.S. issues world travel warning after Iran attack

People check flight schedules in a nearly empty departure hall at Ben Gurion International Airport in Lod, near Tel Aviv, on Sunday, August 4, 2024. On Sunday night, the State Department issued a worldwide caution security alert warning Americans overseas to exercise increased caution. Photo by Debbie Hill/ UPI | License Photo June 22 (UPI) -- The State Department on Sunday night issued a global travel advisory warning Americans abroad to exercise increased caution after the United States attacked Iran's nuclear facilities the night prior. The statement from the State Department does not mention the Saturday night attack but acknowledged that "there is the potential for demonstrations against U.S. citizens and interests abroad. "The conflict between Israel and Iran has resulted in disruptions to travel and periodic closure of airspace across the Middle East," the statement said. "The Department of State advises U.S. citizens worldwide to exercise increased caution." The United States entered the Israel-Iran war on Saturday when President Donald Trump ordered U.S. warplanes to attack three of Iran's nuclear facilities. Iran has vowed revenge while deciding how, when and where it will retaliate. Israel and Iran have been in a proxy war for years, but it exploded to the forefront following the Tehran-backed militia Hamas' bloody Oct. 7, 2023, surprise attack on Israel. Earlier this month, the war between the two countries intensified when Israel attacked some of Iran's nuclear facilities and killed some of its top military officers. Iran has responded by targeting Tel Aviv and other regions of Israel. The announcement from the State Department comes after it warned Americans last week against traveling to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. On June 14, it authorized the voluntary departure from Israel of family members and non-emergency U.S. government employees "due to volatile and unpredictable security situation in the region." Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, but fears that it might be working to achieve one has been at the forefront of both U.S. and Israeli foreign policy concerning Tehran.

Boston Globe

an hour ago

• Boston Globe

Officials concede they don't know the fate of Iran's uranium stockpile

The Iranians have made it clear they are not interested in having conversations with the United States, accusing Washington of deceiving officials in the Iranian capital, Tehran, during the last set of negotiations while planning the air attack. Moreover, that stockpile of fuel is now one of the few nuclear bargaining chips in Iranian hands. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up In a briefing for reporters Sunday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the new chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, avoided Trump's maximalist claims of success. They said an initial battle-damage assessment of all three sites struck by Air Force B-2 bombers and Navy Tomahawk missiles showed 'severe damage and destruction.' Satellite photographs of the primary target, the Fordo uranium enrichment plant that Iran built under a mountain, showed several holes where a dozen 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrators -- one of the largest conventional bombs in the U.S. arsenal -- punched deep holes in the rock. The Israeli military's initial analysis concluded that the site, the target of American and Israeli military planners for more than 26 years, sustained serious damage from the strike but had not been destroyed. Advertisement But there was also evidence, according to two Israeli officials with knowledge of the intelligence, that Iran had moved equipment and uranium from the site in recent days. And there was growing evidence that the Iranians, attuned to Trump's repeated threats to take military action, had removed 400 kilograms, or roughly 880 pounds, of uranium enriched to 60% purity. The level usually used in nuclear weapons is 90%. The 60% enriched fuel had been stored deep inside another nuclear complex, near the ancient capital of Isfahan. Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said by text that the fuel had last been seen by his teams of United Nations inspectors about a week before Israel began its attacks on Iran. In an interview Sunday on CNN, he said 'Iran has made no secret that they have protected this material.' Asked by text later in the day whether he meant that the fuel stockpile -- which is stored in special casks small enough to fit in the trunks of about 10 cars -- had been moved, he replied, 'I do.' That appeared to be the mystery about the fuel's fate that Vance was discussing. If so, Isfahan would not be the only place where the custodians of the Iranian nuclear program -- a subject of nationalistic pride and the symbol of Iran's ability to defend itself -- were trying to move equipment and material out of sight, as they also tried to harden the Fordo plant to protect what had to stay in place. Advertisement Satellite images released by Maxar Technologies at the tunnels leading into the Fordo mountain, taken in the days before the American strike, show 16 cargo trucks positioned near an entrance. An analysis by the Open Source Centre in London suggested that Iran may have been preparing the site for a strike. It is unclear what, if anything, was removed from the facility. In fact, there was only so much the Iranians could save. The giant centrifuges that spin at supersonic speeds, purifying uranium, are piped together and bolted to the cement floor. One U.S. official said it would have been unrealistic to completely move equipment out of Fordo after the conflict with Israel began. The official added that historical documents about the nuclear program were buried in the bowels of the site, likely complicating any efforts in reconstituting it. In coming days, both the Iranians and intelligence agencies expect to learn more about the Natanz enrichment site, which is older, larger and less well protected than Fordo. It was struck by the Israelis repeatedly, and they destroyed an aboveground enrichment center and disrupted the electrical system. Grossi later said he believed the interruption of the electrical supply could have sent the centrifuges spinning out of control, probably destroying all of them. How long it would take the Iranians to repair and replace that equipment is unknown; it would probably stretch for years. But Iran is also building a new, deep replacement for Natanz in the south of the city. Officials in Tehran have told the IAEA that they have not yet opened the plant, so there is nothing to see. Advertisement If Iran is truly pursuing a nuclear weapon -- which it officially denies -- it is taking more time than any nuclear-armed nation in history. The United States developed the Manhattan Project in four years or so, developing the bombs dropped at Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the war in the Pacific. The Soviet Union conducted its first test in 1949, only four years later. India, Pakistan and Israel all sped the process. The Iranians have been at it for more than 20 years, and an archive of data stolen from a Tehran warehouse by Israel a number of years ago showed that Iranian engineers were exploring nuclear triggers and other equipment that would only be used to detonate a weapon. That was around 2003, when, according to American intelligence, the engineers received instructions to halt work on weaponization. Comments by Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in recent days suggest they believe that work has resumed, though no evidence to support the contention has been made public. If so, the strikes on Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan may only reinforce the view among Iranian leaders that they need a weapon for survival of the government. History also suggests that diplomacy has usually been more effective than sabotage or military attacks in providing assurances that a country does not pursue atomic weapons. More than 15 years ago, the joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Natanz, using a sophisticated cyber weapon, caused about one-fifth of the country's 5,000 or so centrifuges to blow up. Advertisement But the Iranians not only rebuilt, they installed more sophisticated equipment. Before Israel's attack this month, they had roughly 19,000 centrifuges in operation. It was only when the Obama administration struck the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran that the United States got a fuller picture of its capabilities, thanks to the work of inspectors. And those inspections were choked off -- and many security cameras disabled -- after Trump declared the nuclear accord a 'disaster' and withdrew from it. Tehran's reaction was to scale up centrifuge production, enrich uranium at levels only weapons states need, and stonewall the IAEA. Now, it is unclear whether the team of IAEA inspectors who were in the country when the conflict with Israel broke out will be permitted by the Iranian government to resume their inspections, which would include verifying the whereabouts and the safety of that near-bomb-grade uranium. All international inspections have been suspended during wartime, Iranian officials have said. And even if they were to resume, it was unclear if the inspectors could physically gain access to the bombed Fordo underground plant, or the wreckage of the larger enrichment facility at Natanz. Mick Mulroy, a former Pentagon official in the first Trump administration and a former CIA officer, said of the strike: 'With the type and amount of munitions used, it will likely set back the Iranian nuclear weapon program two to five years.' This article originally appeared in