Giorgia Carraretto
On the evening of Monday 16 October, a forty five-year old man, named Abdesalem shot two Swedish men in Brussels on the Boulevard d’Ypres.
The double-shooting took place 5km from the Brussel’s stadium, where Belgium was playing Sweden in order to qualify for the football European Championships 2024. Abdesalem cornered people in an apartment building, and he fired four gunshots, two people died and another was injured.
In 2019, Abdesalem, originally from Tunisia, had crossed the Belgian border illegally, and had applied for a place at the asylum. However, his application was rejected in October 2020 and consequently, he ‘went off the radar’. Following this, the police observed his behaviour and ruled him as a people-smuggler as well as an illegal inhabitant of Belgium.
Prior to the homicides, Abdesalem posted a video outlining his plans for the attack, stating that his aim was to avenge the murder of a Palestinian boy killed in an anti-Muslim attack in the USA a couple of days before. After the shootings, he posted a follow-up video admitting to the murder and announcing that he committed such murders to fight for God (in response to the Islamophobic stabbing).
There was an overnight tracking operation by the police and manhunt for Abdesalem. He was finally found on Tuesday morning after a witness informed the police of his location at the cafe in Schaerbeek, in northern Brussels. He was carrying a military weapon and a bag of clothes, indicating he might have been planning to escape that day. The police hastily arrived at the location and shot the suspect in the chest. The alleged killer then died from his wounds despite the intensive care treatment he was given at the hospital.
The struggle against terrorism has questioned the legal system and has raised issues such as ‘targeted killing’ – the killing of people because they are involved in terrorist groups. Terrorists are regarded and treated as criminals but also may be military targets. The character of terrorists results in policies ruling that a state must weigh all outcomes before concluding that the only possible way to prevent another terrorist attack is by engaging in targeted killing.
Some people may argue that in this case, the targeted killing was unlawful. This is because Abdesalem had socially admitted to his killings, meaning that if a trial were to happen he would surely be judged as guilty and convicted.
Furthermore, in the past he had applied for asylum, which showcased his need for help and the rejection may have led to his criminal behaviour (the domino theory).
Also, Abdesalem had his life taken away from him as a result of the murders he committed. It may come across as hypocritical for the police officers to shoot him, as that would also be committing murder.
On the other hand, some people believe it was right for the officers to kill him. This is because he posed a threat to many. The fact that he had been seen carrying a military weapon suggested that he was unwilling to change, and that even if he escaped, he would have probably committed other crimes (possibly other terrorist attacks) in other countries.
There are some occasions in which the police killing a suspect is justifiable, the main reason being self-defence or defence of an innocent person. Recalling his past and his capabilities of causing harm, some people may believe that he should have been killed to protect people, especially since this shooting caused a lot of fear in Belgium and in all Europe.
Moreover, in the video he posted on social media, he voiced his support to other terrorist groups, evidently telling the world his intentions had not changed, and showing that he was conscious of what he was doing.
This case is one among many terrorist killings, which raised the question: should death be considered as a lawful punishment at times?