French prosecutors have requested a two-year election ban and a 10-month suspended prison sentence for European Parliament member Rima Hassan over an X post, French media reported on 20 October.
The French-Palestinian politician, who represents the left-wing La France Insoumise party, is standing trial in Paris on a charge of glorifying terrorism.
The court is expected to deliver its verdict on 30 November. No conviction has been issued, and the penalties requested by prosecutors remain subject to the judges' decision.
Hassan has rejected the accusation, describing the proceedings as an attempt to intimidate her and silence an opposition politician.
The case concerns a social media post published on 26 March 2026 that referred to Kozo Okamoto, a Japanese Red Army member involved in the 1972 attack at Lod Airport near Tel Aviv.
The attack, carried out on 30 May 1972, killed 26 people and injured more than 80 others, according to historical accounts cited in French court reporting.
A deleted post at the centre of the trial
Hassan's post included a photograph of Okamoto and a quotation attributed to him concerning the Palestinian cause and resistance to oppression.
Prosecutors argue that sharing the quotation alongside his photograph presented a favourable portrayal of someone involved in a deadly attack.
According to AFP, the prosecution told the court that the post diminished the seriousness of the killings and portrayed the perpetrator positively.
The prosecutor argued that the publication amounted to glorification of terrorism under French law.
Hassan subsequently deleted the post after investigators contacted her.
Le Monde reported that it had attracted more than 250,000 views within approximately 18 hours of publication.
The prosecution rejected suggestions that the case had been brought because of Hassan's political positions, saying the investigation concerned the content of the publication.
The case was taken up by the Paris prosecutor's unit responsible for online hate offences, according to the newspaper's account of the proceedings.
Defence challenges prosecution and immunity issue
Hassan and her lawyer, Vincent Brengarth, challenged both the legal basis of the charge and the handling of the investigation during hearings on 19 and 20 October.
The defence argued that Hassan's political expression was protected by parliamentary immunity and questioned whether the investigation could proceed without authorisation from the European Parliament.
Brengarth also challenged the legality of investigative measures taken against his client and asked the court to consider referring questions concerning parliamentary immunity to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
The judges deferred decisions on those procedural arguments while examining the merits of the case.
Hassan told the court that she believed the proceedings were intended to discourage criticism of Israeli government policies.
She also accused the authorities of failing to properly investigate inaccurate media claims that drugs had been found among her belongings during police questioning in April.
Le Monde reported that those allegations were false.
The defence requested an acquittal, arguing that the prosecution had misinterpreted the publication and that its context did not establish the criminal offence alleged.
Political reactions to the case
The prosecution's request for a two-year electoral ban prompted criticism from La France Insoumise leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon.
Writing on X, Mélenchon accused supporters of President Emmanuel Macron of abusing political power and aligning themselves with the demands of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
His allegations were political accusations, not findings by the court.
Hassan, a lawyer specialising in international law who was elected to the European Parliament in 2024, has been involved in several legal disputes concerning her public statements about Israel and Palestine.
During the hearing, she described herself as an elected representative repeatedly targeted by legal complaints because of her political positions.
The proceedings also featured arguments over freedom of expression, the legal definition of glorifying terrorism and the responsibilities of elected officials.
Prosecutors maintained that political office did not exempt public figures from criminal law governing statements about terrorist acts.
The Paris court is scheduled to issue its judgment on 30 November 2026.
