Two defendants have been sentenced to 18 years in prison apiece for membership in a terrorist organization in relation to the 2016 terrorist attack in Nice, France that left 86 people dead.

The two had provided moral and material support to the perpetrator of the terrorist attack and inspired him, presiding judge Laurent Raviot said at the Paris Palace of Justice on Tuesday.

A connection to an international terrorist organization, such as Daesh, had not been found, although the court did see a clear inspiration in the movement.

The court imposed 12 years imprisonment on the man who provided the perpetrator with the firearm he used in the attack. The other five defendants in the trial, who were also involved in obtaining a weapon, are to serve between two and eight years in prison.

On July 14, 2016, Tunisian Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel drove a lorry weighing several tons into a crowd of people on the seaside Promenade des Anglais in the Mediterranean resort city of Nice. He also shot at people.

There were 86 fatalities, including two schoolgirls and a teacher from Berlin. More than 200 people were injured. The perpetrator was shot dead after the evening attack, which struck as people were celebrating the Bastille Day national holiday.

Since September, a special court in Paris has been reviewing the attack. More than 2,000 relatives and victims appeared as joint plaintiffs. Over a period of four weeks, they told the court about their memories of the massacre and the traces the terrorist act left on them.

Although the attacker was killed by the police at the time, the preparation as well as his attitude were an essential part of the trial.

The prosecution concluded that the man had much more than a mere curiosity for Daesh. He had watched numerous beheading videos of the terrorist militia, had carried out intensive – at some point daily – research, for example, on events in Syria and Iraq, on terrorist calls, on Daesh and al-Qaida, as well as on the amphetamine-like stimulant Captagon, which is considered a "jihadist drug."

"The perpetrator very clearly wanted to give (the attack) a jihadist dimension," the prosecution's closing argument stated.

In their closing arguments, the prosecution accused two defendants of membership in a terrorist organization and demanded 15 years in prison for them.

The two close acquaintances of the killer had known about his ideology and shared it at least to some extent, they said. They were also aware that their acquaintance was capable of committing an attack. Both men are also said to have been involved in the search for a weapon.

For a third accused, the prosecution did not demand a sentence for membership in a terrorist organization, contrary to the indictment. Apart from the search for a weapon, there had been no relationship to the perpetrator, they said.

According to the prosecution, the man who provided the killer with the pistol used in the attack should be imprisoned for 15 years, as should the two acquaintances.

He had committed the worst crime that was at issue in the trial, the prosecution said in its closing argument.

For the others, the prosecution has demanded between two and 10 years in prison.