The bizarre interrogation of a blogger

Material compiled by our regional editor for the Middle-East, Marc Daou

Freedom of expression is kept under close supervision in Syria, and the internet is no exception to the rule. The latest example cites the case of Roukana Hamour, a family woman who ran for the last legislative elections to denounce the corruption and vote-catching of the authorities.

Roukana was arrested on 25 October outside her home and in front of her children. She was then interrogated by the Syrian secret services, specifically on the subject of a critical commentary of the regime posted on her blog. She was released three hours later.

She tells of the conditions of her arrest, which she compares with a kidnapping; and her interrogation by the secret services.

Post your questions to Marc Daou and Roukana Hamour

Extracts of the interrogation

Interrogator: We’ve been very patient with you, but now you have crossed the line. Do you know Ali H?

Roukana Hamour: Yes, I know him through the internet, like many other people who leave comments on my blog.

I: I would like you to give me the address of your blog so that we can visit it too.

R H: So wait, why are you interrogating me if you’ve never visited my blog?

I: I have the instructions that I must take up an investigation.

R H: So, if I understand well, to summarise, you have kidnapped me- and I insist on using that term- to interrogate me about the subject of a comment left on my blog by someone I don’t know?

I: Yes, what is the nationality of this man? Is he Syrian? We want to know everything about him.

R H: I don’t know anything.

I: How is that possible? You have, in fact, responded to this man. How can you not know his nationality?

R H: But I only answered his comment and my response was in no way insulting to the government. I’ve never met him. His nationality doesn’t interest me. (…)

I: We’re not complaining about the content of your response, we’re blaming you for having responded to his comment at all, which insulted the government.

R H: In any case, you would have questioned me in the same way if I had not responded, arguing that ‘silence speaks consent’.

I: His comment did not need to be published. Or, even better, you could have answered that his comment is an insult to Dr Bachar (the Syrian president) and on the contrary you should love Dr Bachar.

R H: It’s not my business, he’s responsible for his own ideas, everybody is free to express themselves as they wish. Moreover, Dr Bachar has the possibility to press charges if he feels insulted, but that’s neither my problem.

(…)

I: And you, what’s your opinion of Dr Bachar?

R H: That’s none of your business. My opinion concerns only me and I’m free to have one.

I: Your answer could lead to the belief that you oppose the regime.

R H: Listen, I’m neither an opponent nor an ally of the regime, I’m just a member of the public who has three children, and who’s trying to get her rights respected and fighting against injustice.

* The comment in question, left by Ali last April, denounced "the masquerade which became the Syrian Parliament".