Categories
Press Release

Anti-Palestinian Surveillance in Germany: New Hearing in the Case of Dr Anna Younes

GERMAN VERSION BELOW/DEUTSCHE ÜBERSETZUNG UNTEN

Today 12 April 2024, Dr Anna-E. Younes is challenging anti-Palestinian organisations RIAS Berlin and MBR (Mobile Beratungsstelle gegen Rechts) in the Berlin District Court (Landgericht Berlin) with the support of the ELSC.

Dr Anna Younes is a German Palestinian scholar working on the ‘New Antisemitism’ discourse, race critical theories and settler-/colonial theories. Like many others she has already been subjected to several disinformation campaigns, publicly defamed, censored and unfairly excluded from public and academic spaces way before 2019. In 2019, however, Dr Younes discovered that a secret dossier which selectively draws on certain publications of hers and takes them out of context, was written up and distributed  by RIAS/MBR  in order to get her disinvited from public speaking engagements. Said dossier had been privately passed on to people in die Linke and distorted her work or articles to make defamatory statements about her, including by framing her as an anti-Jewish racist and sexist terrorist sympathizer. Subsequently, Dr Younes was disinvited from a panel discussion on right-wing extremism and anti-Muslim racism organised by the Berlin chapter of Die Linke where she was supposed to present her work on anti-Muslim racism and right-wing networks in Germany.

In violation of European data protection law, Dr Younes was surveilled for her scholarship and activism, causing her loss of employment, reputational damage, as well as an uncanny repetition of surveillance strategies as known from German history. Dr. Younes, the ELSC and her lawyers argue that the creation and circulation of RIAS’ secret dossier – without Dr. Younes’ knowledge or consent – gravely infringed upon her right to privacy, freedom of expression, and academic freedom and amounts to digital surveillance. More importantly, her case does not stand in isolation; it rather unmasks the multiple layers of systematic repression that have been silencing and criminalising Palestinian voices in Germany for a long time. Beyond that, this case is also crucial as it testifies to the importance of halting further infringements on the right to privacy and to free political expression of political minorities, such as anti-war and anti-capitalist movements or climate activists.

Concerned about the consequences of this repressive surveillance for herself and other academics, activists or journalists, Dr Younes reached out to the ELSC and took legal action

Nearly two years ago, the Berlin District Court upheld Dr Younes’ claims and ordered VDK – the German state-funded organisation that legally represents RIAS Berlin and MBR – to give Dr Anna Younes access to the data that the two organisations had secretly gathered and disseminated. The information released by VDK revealed that RIAS Berlin and MBR had been collecting people’s personal data based on their ‘positions on Israel and BDS’. 

Dr Younes and her lawyer now expect the court to order RIAS/MBR to pay damages for the harm suffered by Dr Younes for more than two years. Not only should RIAS/MBR pay damages for having violated Dr Younes’ right to information, as confirmed by the first instance court, but also for the unlawful collection and dissemination of a dossier aiming to damage her reputation.

Dr Younes’ lawyer, Alexander Gorski, said: 

This legal battle is about making sure that state-funded organisations such as RIAS Berlin and MBR are held accountable for their repressive practices which have extreme consequences for individuals’ reputation and fundamental rights and freedoms. This must stop.

In March 2024, RIAS (the federal organisation whereof RIAS Berlin forms the local Berlin branch) released their report on ‘Anti-Semitism within BDS’, which enacts yet another targeted attack against the BDS movement and its supporters. Furthermore, RIAS also continues to use unfounded allegations of antisemitism and support of terrorism to further repress Palestine solidarity as well as turning the important category of anti-Jewish racism to mean nothing but “critical of Israeli politics” thereby enabling a dangerous and deeply racist hollowing out of what we mean by anti-Jewish racism. Finally, within that vein, RIAS also confirms its use of the harmful and widely criticized ‘IHRA definition of antisemitism’ to assess incidents of antisemitism.

It is obvious that organisations like RIAS are instrumentalizing the fight against anti-Jewish racism to platform a discourse aimed at repressing and erasing Palestinian voices and anti- or de-colonial narratives, especially at a moment when a wide range of individuals and groups in German civil society are raising their voice against the ongoing genocide and against Germany’s support of Israel’s settler violence. – said Dr Younes.

The decision from the judge is expected within a few weeks.

Read more about the case


Antipalästinensische Überwachung in Deutschland: neue Anhörung im Fall von Dr. Anna Younes

Heute, am 12. April 2024, klagt Dr. Anna-E. Younes mit Unterstützung der ELSC gegen die antipalästinensischen Organisationen RIAS Berlin und MBR (Mobile Beratungsstelle gegen Rechts) vor dem Landgericht Berlin.

Dr. Anna Younes ist eine deutsch-palästinensische Wissenschaftlerin, die sich mit dem “Neuen Antisemitismus”-Diskurs, rassenkritischen Theorien und Siedler-/Kolonialtheorien beschäftigt. Wie viele andere war sie bereits vor 2019 mehreren Desinformationskampagnen ausgesetzt, wurde öffentlich diffamiert, zensiert und zu Unrecht aus dem öffentlichen und akademischen Raum ausgeschlossen. Im Jahr 2019 entdeckte Dr. Younes jedoch, dass ein geheimes Dossier, das sich selektiv auf bestimmte Veröffentlichungen von ihr stützt und diese aus dem Zusammenhang reißt, vom RIAS/MBR erstellt und verbreitet wurde, um sie von öffentlichen Auftritten auszuladen. Dieses Dossier wurde privat an Personen in der Partei Die Linke weitergegeben und verfälschte ihre Arbeit oder Artikel, um diffamierende Aussagen über sie zu machen, unter anderem indem sie als antijüdische, rassistische und sexistische Terroristensympathisantin dargestellt wurde. In der Folge wurde Dr. Younes von einer Podiumsdiskussion über Rechtsextremismus und antimuslimischen Rassismus ausgeladen, die von der Berliner Sektion der Partei Die Linke organisiert wurde und auf der sie ihre Arbeit über antimuslimischen Rassismus und rechte Netzwerke in Deutschland vorstellen sollte.

Unter Verstoß gegen das europäische Datenschutzrecht wurde Dr. Younes wegen ihrer wissenschaftlichen Arbeit und ihres Engagements überwacht, was zum Verlust ihres Arbeitsplatzes und zur Schädigung ihres Rufes führte und eine unheimliche Wiederholung der aus der deutschen Geschichte bekannten Überwachungsstrategien darstellt. Der Fall, den Dr. Younes, die ELSC und ihre Anwälte aufgebaut haben, argumentiert, dass die Erstellung und Verbreitung des geheimen Dossiers des RIAS – ohne Dr. Younes’ Wissen oder Zustimmung – ihr Recht auf Privatsphäre, freie Meinungsäußerung und akademische Freiheit schwerwiegend verletzt hat und einer digitalen Überwachung gleichkommt. Noch wichtiger ist, dass ihr Fall nicht isoliert dasteht, sondern vielmehr die vielen Ebenen der systematischen Unterdrückung aufdeckt, die palästinensische Stimmen in Deutschland seit langem zum Schweigen bringen und kriminalisieren. Darüber hinaus ist dieser Fall auch deshalb so entscheidend, weil er zeigt, wie wichtig es ist, weitere Verstöße gegen das Recht auf Privatsphäre und freie politische Meinungsäußerung von politischen Minderheiten wie Antikriegs- und antikapitalistischen Bewegungen oder Klimaaktivisten zu unterbinden.

Besorgt über die Folgen dieser repressiven Überwachung für sie selbst und andere Akademiker, Aktivisten oder Journalisten wandte sich Dr. Younes an die ELSC und erhob rechtliche Schritte

Vor fast zwei Jahren gab das Landgericht Berlin den Klagen von Dr. Younes statt und ordnete an, dass der VdK – die deutsche staatlich finanzierte Organisation, die RIAS Berlin und MBR rechtlich vertritt – Dr. Anna Younes Zugang zu den Daten gewährt, die die beiden Organisationen heimlich gesammelt und verbreitet hatten. Die von der VdK herausgegebenen Informationen enthüllten, dass RIAS Berlin und MBR personenbezogene Daten von Personen auf der Grundlage ihrer “Positionen zu Israel und BDS” gesammelt hatten. 

Dr. Younes und ihr Anwalt erwarten nun, dass das Gericht den RIAS/MBR zur Zahlung von Schadenersatz für den Schaden verurteilt, den Dr. Younes mehr als zwei Jahre lang erlitten hat. Der RIAS/MBR sollte nicht nur Schadensersatz dafür zahlen, dass das Recht von Dr. Younes auf Information verletzt wurde, wie das erstinstanzliche Gericht bestätigt hat, sondern auch für die unrechtmäßige Sammlung und Verbreitung eines Dossiers, das darauf abzielt, ihren Ruf zu schädigen.

Dr. Younes’ Anwalt, Alexander Gorski, sagte: 

In diesem Rechtsstreit geht es darum, sicherzustellen, dass staatlich finanzierte Organisationen wie RIAS Berlin und MBR für ihre repressiven Praktiken zur Rechenschaft gezogen werden, die extreme Auswirkungen auf den Ruf und die Grundrechte und -freiheiten des Einzelnen haben. Das muss aufhören.

Im März 2024 veröffentlichte RIAS (die Bundesorganisation, deren Ortsgruppe in Berlin RIAS Berlin ist) ihren Bericht über “Antisemitismus in BDS”, der einen weiteren gezielten Angriff auf die BDS-Bewegung und ihre UnterstützerInnen darstellt. Darüber hinaus nutzt RIAS weiterhin unbegründete Vorwürfe des Antisemitismus und der Unterstützung des Terrorismus, um die Solidarität mit Palästina weiter zu unterdrücken und die wichtige Kategorie des antijüdischen Rassismus auf nichts anderes als “kritisch gegenüber israelischer Politik” zu reduzieren, wodurch eine gefährliche und zutiefst rassistische Auslöschung dessen ermöglicht wird, was wir unter antijüdischem Rassismus verstehen. Schließlich bestätigt RIAS in diesem Zusammenhang auch die Verwendung der schädlichen und weithin kritisierten “IHRA-Definition von Antisemitismus”, um Vorfälle von Antisemitismus zu bewerten.

Es ist offensichtlich, dass Organisationen wie RIAS den Kampf gegen antijüdischen Rassismus instrumentalisieren, um einem Diskurs eine Plattform zu bieten, der darauf abzielt, palästinensische Stimmen und anti- oder de-koloniale Narrative zu unterdrücken und auszulöschen, insbesondere zu einem Zeitpunkt, an dem ein breites Spektrum von Einzelpersonen und Gruppen in der deutschen Zivilgesellschaft ihre Stimme gegen den anhaltenden Völkermord und gegen Deutschlands Unterstützung der israelischen Siedlergewalt erhebt

– so Dr. Younes.

Die Entscheidung des Richters wird in den nächsten Wochen erwartet.

Categories
Press Release

Legal Action to Stop Arms Exports from Germany to Israel

GERMAN VERSION BELOW/DEUTSCHE ÜBERSETZUNG UNTEN

Press release – ELSC (European Legal Support Center), PIPD (Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy), Law for Palestine under the Justice and Accountability for Palestine Initiative, and Forensis.

Berlin – 5 April 2024

On April 5, 2024, Berlin lawyers are filing an urgent application against the German government to stop the approval of war weapons exports to Israel. The urgent appeal is being filed by Palestinians in Gaza who are demanding an immediate halt to the supply of weapons to Israel. As there is reason to believe that these weapons are being used to commit grave violations of international law, such as the crime of genocide and war crimes, the applicants are hereby demanding that the German government protect their right to life.

In 2023, the German government issued arms exports licenses to Israel worth 326.5 million Euro, the majority of which were approved after October 7, 2023, a tenfold increase compared to 2022. The German government is currently supporting the Israeli army by approving the supply of 3,000 portable anti-tank weapons, 500,000 rounds of ammunition for machine guns, submachine guns or other fully or semi-automatic firearms, as well as other military equipment, while in early 2024 Germany was preparing the authorisation of 10,000 rounds of 120mm tank ammunition. In addition, Germany authorised Israel to use two of the five TP-Heron combat drones that they had previously leased. A comprehensive report recently published by Forensis, Forensic Architecture’s Berlin-based affiliate, that brings together governmental records with data from monitoring groups and other initiatives, provides significant additional insights on past, current, and potential future arms exports from Germany to Israel.

As early as February 23, 2024, Palestinians filed criminal charges against members of the German government for aiding genocide in Gaza. The urgent application is therefore only logical: the arms deliveries and support provided by the Federal Government to Israel violate the Federal Republic’s obligations under the War Weapons Control Act. The criteria for the approval of arms exports include, among other things, that the weapons are not used against Germany’s obligations of the international law, in this case that Israel does not violate human rights and international humanitarian law. Since the ICJ in its decision of January 26, 2024 already sees evidence of genocide in Gaza, the Lawyers’ Collective believes that the delivery of weapons is contrary to these obligations. A Dutch court of appeal also ruled on February 26, 2024 that the delivery of F-35 spare parts to Israel must be stopped. The aim of the urgent motion is therefore to immediately stop future approvals of weapons of war deliveries to Israel and to revoke approvals that have already been granted.

SUPPORT THE CASE


Eilantrag gegen Waffenexporte von Deutschland nach Israel

Pressemitteilung von ELSC (European Legal Support Center), PIPD (Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy), Law for Palestine, Justice and Accountability for Palestine Initiative und Forensis.

Berlin – 5.4.2024

Am 5. April 2024 reichen Berliner Anwält:innen einen Eilantrag beim Verwaltungsgericht in Berlin gegen die Bundesregierung ein, um die Genehmigung von Kriegswaffenexporten nach Israel zu stoppen. Der Eilantrag wird von Palästinenser:innen in Gaza gestellt, die eine sofortige Einstellung der Waffenlieferungen an Israel fordern. Da Grund zu der Annahme besteht, dass die Waffen für Völkerrechtsverletzungen wie Völkermord und Kriegsverbrechen eingesetzt werden, verfolgen die Antragsteller:innen ihren Rechtsanspruch, dass die Bundesregierung ihr Recht auf Leben schützen muss.

Im Jahr 2023 genehmigte die Bundesregierung Rüstungsexporte nach Israel im Wert von 326,5 Millionen Euro, die meisten davon nach dem 7. Oktober 2023. Im Vergleich zu 2022 verzehnfachten sich damit die Rüstungsexporte. Aktuell unterstützt die Bundesregierung die israelische Armee, indem sie die Lieferung von 3.000 tragbaren Panzerabwehrwaffen, 500.000 Schuss Munition für Maschinengewehre, Maschinenpistolen oder andere voll- oder halbautomatische Schusswaffen sowie weiteren Rüstungsgütern genehmigt. Anfang 2024 hat die Bundesregierung die Exportbewilligung von 10.000 Schuss Panzermunition geprüft. Außerdem genehmigte Deutschland Israel die Nutzung von zuvor geleasten TP-Heron-Kampfdrohnen. Darüber hinaus liefert ein umfassender Bericht, der kürzlich von Forensis – die in Berlin ansässige Schwesteragentur von Forensic Architecture – veröffentlicht wurde und Informationen aus Regierungsdokumenten mit Daten unabhängiger Monitoring-Gruppen zusammenführt, entscheidende Erkenntnisse hinsichtlich vergangener, gegenwärtiger und möglicherweise zukünftiger Rüstungs- und Waffenexporte von Deutschland nach Israel.

Bereits am 23. Februar 2024 stellten Palästinenser:innen Strafanzeige gegen Mitglieder der Bundesregierung wegen Beihilfe zum Völkermord in Gaza. Der Eilantrag ist daher nur folgerichtig: Die Waffenlieferungen und Unterstützungsleistungen der Bundesregierung an Israel verstoßen gegen die Verpflichtungen der Bundesrepublik aus dem Kriegswaffenkontrollgesetz.  Zu den Kriterien für die Genehmigung von Waffenexporten gehört unter anderem, dass die Waffen nicht gegen die Verpflichtungen des Bundes aus dem Völkerrecht eingesetzt werden, in diesem Fall, dass Israel nicht gegen die Menschenrechte und das humanitäre Völkerrecht verstößt. Da der IGH in seiner Entscheidung vom 26. Januar 2024 bereits Anhaltspunkte für einen Völkermord in Gaza sieht, steht hier nach Ansicht des Anwält:innenkollektivs zu befürchten, dass die Waffenlieferung diesen Verpflichtungen entgegen stehen. Auch ein niederländisches Berufungsgericht hat bereits am 26. Februar 2024 entschieden, dass die Lieferung von F-35-Ersatzteilen an Israel gestoppt werden müssen. Ziel des Eilantrags ist es daher, künftige Genehmigungen für Kriegswaffenlieferungen an Israel sofort zu stoppen und bereits erteilte Genehmigungen zu widerrufen.

Categories
Press Release

Accountability Now: Palestinians Sue German Government Officials for Enabling the Genocide in Gaza

GERMAN VERSION BELOW/DEUTSCHE ÜBERSETZUNG UNTEN

Berlin – 23 February 2024

Today, a group of German lawyers – representing families of two Gazans – is filing a criminal complaint against German Government officials (1), for the crime of aiding and abetting genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza by providing Israel with weapons and issuing related export permissions. They are supported by civil society organisations ELSC (European Legal Support Center), PIPD (Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy) and Law for Palestine under the Justice and Accountability for Palestine Initiative. The charges are being filed at the Office of the Federal Prosecutor in Karlsruhe (‘Generalbundesanwaltschaft’). 

In a historic ruling on 26 January 2024 in the case filed by South Africa against Israel for the crime of Genocide, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered provisional measures against the “serious risk” of genocide and stated that the latter is “plausibly taking place”. Following that ruling, Germany, like other Third States, has a clear obligation to prevent genocide and German State officials should use their leverage and employ all lawful means at their disposal to influence Israel to refrain from genocidal acts. 

German criminal law requires a ground for initial suspicion to start investigations on a potential crime being committed. The ICJ ruling clearly showed that there is such ground for initial suspicion when it comes to the crime of genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza.

When it comes to “aiding and abetting”, this can be done through logistical, financial or material support, but also by creating favorable conditions for the main crime. In particular, aiding and abetting includes the authorization of arms exports and political support.

The German state is one of the countries that has shown some of the strongest political and material support to Israel in its assault on the Gaza Strip and the Palestinians, with many German officials also inciting to genocide in their statements since October 2023.

The plaintiffs have decided to act, attempting to hold Germany accountable for its complicity in the unspeakable horrors their families are living through. Nora Ragab, an activist and plaintiff in the case, who has relatives in Gaza, declared:

We the living must remember the dead in Gaza, tell their stories and fight for justice. We, Palestinians in the diaspora, will not stand by and watch a genocide being committed against our families and our people. We will use all means at our disposal, from protests on the streets to lawsuits in criminal courts. Today we aim to hold the German government accountable for its complicity in the genocide in Gaza.

The case notably draws on the fact that in 2023, Germany’s arms exports to Israel amounted to EUR 326.5 million, most of which were approved after October 7, 2023, a tenfold increase of arms exports to Israel compared to 2022. Weapons imported from Germany make up 28 percent of Israel’s military imports.

The German government approved more than 300 additional export applications for military equipment worth EUR 306.4 million. It is currently examining Israel’s request for the delivery of tank ammunition, namely 10,000 rounds of 120-millimeter precision ammunition, to which the federal ministries involved have already agreed in principle.

Many countries around the world have taken measures to cut ties with Israel with the genocide unfolding. In Europe, a Dutch Court ordered the government in February 2024 to halt export of F-35 Jets in the light of its international obligations and because there are clear risks that Israel is violating basic principles of international humanitarian law, while the Wallonie region in Belgium has temporarily suspended its exports of gun powder to Israel.

Nadija Samour, the lawyer who filed the case and a legal officer with ELSC said:

Our governments in Europe have a legal obligation not to provide Israel any support in perpetrating the current genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza. This has to stop and this is what we hope to achieve by going to court. This lawsuit sends a clear message to German officials: you cannot continue to remain accomplices of such crime without consequences. We want accountability.

While the world continues to witness the total destruction of Gaza, broadcasted live on TV, it is the responsibility of German courts to prevent the German state from being complicit in such horrors and grave breaches of international humanitarian law.


(1) Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Minister for Foreign Affairs Annalena Baerbock, Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck, Minister of Finance Christian Lindner and members of the “Bundessicherheitsrat”, the government body that authorizes arms export licenses.

***

The Justice and Accountability for Palestine Initiative is a Palestinian-led initiative composed of international legal practitioners and lawyers is pursuing legal action against individuals and entities complicit in the crimes in Palestine including genocide in Gaza.


Rechenschaftspflicht Jetzt: Palästinenser*innen erstatten Strafanzeige gegen deutsche Regierungsmitglieder wegen Beihilfe zum Völkermord in Gaza

Berlin 23.02.2024

Heute erstattet eine Gruppe deutscher Anwält*innen im Namen von deutsch-palästinensischen Familienangehörigen aus Gaza Strafanzeige gegen Mitglieder des Bundessicherheitsrats, unter ihnen Bundeskanzler Olaf Scholz, Bundesministerin des Auswärtigen Annalena Baerbock, Bundesminister für Wirtschaft und Klimaschutz Robert Habeck, und Bundesminister der Finanzen Christian Lindner. 

Der Vorwurf lautet Beihilfe zum Völkermord durch die Genehmigung von Rüstungsexporten, dem unterlassenen Widerruf der bereits erteilten Genehmigungen, sowie die diplomatische Unterstützung Israels – und damit die psychische Beihilfe -, und nicht zuletzt die Einstellung von Hilfszahlungen an die UNRWA.  

Die Gruppe wird unterstützt von den zivilgesellschaftlichen Organisationen ELSC (European Legal Support Center), PIPD (Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy), Law for Palestine, und der Initiative Justice and Accountability for Palestine. Die Strafanzeige wird bei dem Generalbundesanwaltschaft in Karlsruhe erstattet.

Der Internationale Gerichtshof (IGH) ist mit einem historischen Beschluss am 26.01.2024 aufgrund der Klage Südafrikas gegen Israel zum Ergebnis gelangt, dass plausible Anhaltspunkte für einen Genozid an Palästinenser:innen vorliegen.

Folglich hat die Bundesrepublik, genauso wie andere Drittstaaten, die völkerrechtlich verankerte Pflicht, diesen Genozid zu verhindern, und ihren Einfluss und alle rechtlichen Mittel, über die sie verfügt, einzusetzen, um Israel dazu aufzufordern, genozidale Handlungen zu unterlassen.

Gemäß der deutschen Strafprozessordnung ist die Voraussetzung für die Einleitung von Ermittlungen der sogenannte Anfangsverdacht. Der IGH-Beschluss hat deutlich gezeigt, dass ein solcher Anfangsverdacht hinsichtlich eines Völkermords gegen die Palästinenser*innen in Gaza besteht.

Beihilfe kann geleistet werden durch logistische, finanzielle oder materielle Unterstützung, aber auch durch das Kreieren von günstigen Umständen für die Straftat. Hier sind insbesondere die Genehmigungen von Rüstungsexporten und die politische und diplomatische Unterstützung zu benennen.

Die Anzeigeerstatter:innen haben sich entschieden zu handeln, um die Verantwortlichen in Deutschland für die Unterstützung unbeschreiblicher Gräuel zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen. Nora Ragab, eine Aktivistin und Anzeigenerstatterin, die auch Familienangehörige in Gaza hat, erklärte:

“Wir, die Lebenden müssen den Toten in Gaza gedenken, ihre Geschichten erzählen, und für Gerechtigkeit kämpfen. Wir Palästinenser*innen in der Diaspora werden nicht tatenlos zusehen, wie ein Genozid an unseren Familien und unserem Volk begangen wird. Wir nutzen alle Mittel, von den Protesten auf der Straße bis zu Anzeigen und Klagen vor den Gerichten. Heute werden wir die deutsche Regierung für ihre Mitschuld am Völkermord in Gaza zur Verantwortung ziehen.”

Die angezeigten Beihilfehandlungen beziehen sich u.a. auf die Rüstungsexporte im Wert von 326,5 Millionen Euro allein im Jahr 2023, von denen die meisten nach dem 7. Oktober 2023 genehmigt wurden und sich somit im Vergleich zu 2022 verzehnfachten. Das für Waffenexporte zuständige Wirtschaftsministerium erklärte im November, dass die “Anträge auf Ausfuhr von Rüstungsgütern nach Israel prioritär bearbeitet und beschieden” würden. Die deutsche Bundesregierung genehmigte seit dem 7. Oktober 2023 mehr als 300 zusätzliche Exportanträge für Militärausrüstung im Wert von 306,4 Millionen EUR. Allein zwischen dem 7. Oktober und dem 7. November 2023 wurden 185 Genehmigungsanträge abschließend bearbeitet. Die Waffen, die aus Deutschland nach Israel importiert werden, machen 28% der israelischen Rüstungsimporte aus.

Gerade prüft die deutsche Regierung die Lieferung von Panzermunition, die von den Ministerien der hier angezeigten Personen bereits genehmigt wurden. 

Viele Länder der Welt haben bereits Maßnahmen ergriffen, um sich von dem von Israel begangenen Völkermord zu distanzieren. In den Niederlanden hat ein Gericht im Februar 2024 die Regierung dazu aufgefordert, den Export von F-35 Strahljägerteile zu unterlassen, da es klare Risiken gibt, dass Israel aktuell gegen grundlegende Prinzipien des Völkerrechts verstößt. Die Region Wallonien in Belgien hat vorübergehend ihren Export von Schießpulver eingestellt.

Rechtsanwältin Nadija Samour, Bevollmächtigte der Strafanzeigenerstatter*innen sagt hierzu:

“Unsere Regierungen in Deutschland und Europa sind völkerrechtlich verpflichtet, Völkermord zu ahnden und zu verhindern, statt ihn zu untestützen. Mit der Strafanzeige fordern wir die Strafjustiz auf, gegen diese Unterstützungshandlungen vorzugehen. Die Strafanzeige setzt ein klares Zeichen gegen die deutschen Regierungsbeamt*innen: die Unterstützung für einen Genozid hat Konsequenzen.”  

Während die Welt die totale Zerstörung Gazas live auf ihre Bildschirme übertragen bekommt, ist es die Verantwortung der deutschen Strafjustiz zu verhindern, dass der deutsche Staat sich an solchen Gräueln und schweren Verbrechen des internationalen Völkerrechts mitschuldig macht.

Categories
Press Release

Press Release: a Palestinian-led initiative warns public officials in Europe of intention to prosecute over complicity in Israel’s crimes in Gaza.

Amsterdam, January 22, 2024

The Justice and Accountability for Palestine Initiative has issued a stark warning to European public officials of the Austrian, French, German and Dutch governments that they could be individually liable for their role in aiding and abetting Israeli war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of Genocide through their involvement in providing military, economic, and political support to Israel. 

This comes after 108 days of Israel’s relentless war against Gaza and the Palestinian people, resulting in a devastating toll, as of 19 January: 

24,977 Palestinians killed in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

66,082 Palestinians injured in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

1,930,000 Palestinians internally displaced in the Gaza Strip.

10,300 Palestinian children killed in the Gaza Strip.

7,100 Palestinian women killed in the Gaza Strip.

117 Palestinian journalists killed by  Israel.

By ordering 1.2 million people in besieged Gaza to immediately leave their homes in northern Gaza and flee south, Israel has enforced mass displacement which constitutes both a war crime and a crime against humanity. Its ongoing complete siege of the Gaza Strip, restricting electricity, food, water, and other basic necessities, further amounts to collective punishment — a war crime under the Geneva Convention. Already back in November, more than 36 UN experts sounded the alarm about the risk of genocide in Gaza, “disturbed by the failure of governments and international systems to heed [the] call and achieve an immediate ceasefire”… “and profoundly concerned about the support of certain governments for Israel’s strategy of warfare against the besieged population of Gaza, and the failure of the international system to mobilise to prevent genocide”. The Government of South Africa made history, applying to the ICJ under the Genocide Convention accusing Israel of perpetrating genocide against the 2.3 million Palestinians in the occupied and besieged Gaza Strip and requested provisional measures that include a ceasefire and lifting of the blockade. The World Court is expected to decide on the requested measures within days, while deliberations on the merit of the genocide charges against Israel will likely take many months. South Africa’s submission described Israeli actions in Gaza as “genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnic group”.

The German government, for instance, has increased military aid and  promised unwavering economic and political support to Israel as it continues its relentless bombardment of the Gaza Strip. Even when the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza had exceeded 10,000 five weeks into the start of Israel’s brutal onslaught, Chancellor Scholz continued to oppose a ceasefire: “ I do not think the calls for an immediate ceasefire or long pause – which would amount to the same thing – are right.” Meanwhile, the Dutch government greenlighted export of military equipment to Israel during the genocide, while the Austrian and French public officials, through declarations and visits have shown unconditional support to Israel’s bombing campaign and can be legally liable for “aiding and abetting” war crimes. 

‘Despite horrific crimes committed against our people in Gaza, from indiscriminate bombings, mass killings, destruction of civilian infrastructure, starvation and forced displacement of the vast majority of the Palestinians in Gaza, European public officials have continuously and shamelessly supported such crimes publicly, and therefore must be held accountable …’ said Rula Jamal, Co-Director of the Palestine institute for Public Diplomacy (PIPD), one of the co-leads of the initiative.

‘At a time of unprecedented atrocities being committed against the Palestinian people in Gaza, it is not only a moral obligation of European states to uphold the international rule of law and prevent the crime of genocide. It is also a legal obligation: failure to do so might result in individual criminal liability for those who continue to recklessly support Israel’s relentless assault on Palestinians in Gaza’, according to Daan de Grefte, Legal Officer at the European Legal Support Center.

“As legal advocates deeply committed to justice, the unprecedented atrocities against the Palestinian people profoundly stir our consciences, compelling us to unite in fulfilling our duty. Those public officials implicated in supporting Israel’s genocide in Gaza must face accountability. We urge decision-makers at all levels to reconsider their endorsement of international crimes, put an end to the hypocrisy, bring an immediate halt to the ongoing devastation in Gaza, and champion international law as the universal standard for protecting every individual”, emphasized Ihsan Adel, Chairperson of the Law for Palestine.

‘The continuation of unconditional support and armament of the Dutch state of Israel, even after seemingly genocidal statements by Israeli senior officials, is unacceptable. In combination with the horrific facts on the ground in Gaza, specifically the enormous death toll – including almost half of them children, this means that the Dutch government cannot keep supporting Israel’s actions without consequences. The Dutch state and its officials have the duty to prevent genocide and all other violations of humanitarian law’, states attorney Wout Albers of Global Justice Association.

Sustaining such assistance implicates European public officials in the perpetration of war crimes and crimes against humanity as well as failure to prevent the crime of genocide. This may render officials criminally liable for violating international law by ‘aiding and abetting’  Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people.

The full letters to the government officials can be found here.

About The Justice and Accountability for Palestine initiative

The Justice and Accountability for Palestine initiative is a decentralized worldwide network of legal organizations, lawyers and human rights defenders; dedicated to investigating and pursuing legal actions against individuals and entities involved in crimes in Palestine. The initiative is coordinated by Palestine Institute for Public Diplomacy (PIPD), the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) and Law for Palestine (Law4Palestine).

Contact for media enquiries and interviews

  • General inquiries: communication@accountabilitypalestine.org 
  • (Arabic,English) Rula Jamal, communication@accountabilitypalestine.org
  • (Dutch) Daan de Grefte, communication@accountabilitypalestine.org 
  • (French) Inès AbdelRazek, communication@accountabilitypalestine.org
Categories
Press Release

New Report Highlights Major Free Speech Issues in UK Universities

Report published today reveals breaches of fundamental rights in UK Higher Education through the use of the ‘IHRA definition of antisemitism’

London, 13 September 2023

A controversial definition of antisemitism that conflates criticisms of Israel with antisemitism has been used on campuses, leading to restrictions on the freedom of speech of staff and students, the new report reveals. This is the first study to expose the harmful implications of the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism following its adoption in UK universities. It was conducted by the British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES), the largest academic association in Europe focused on the study of the Middle East and North Africa, and the European Legal Support Center (ELSC). The report demonstrates that the definition is not fit for purpose and is infringing on academic freedom and freedom of speech, while also harming the mental health, reputation and career prospects of students and staff.

The report is based on an analysis of 40 cases, recorded between 2017 and 2022, in which university staff and students were accused of antisemitism based on the IHRA definition. In all instances, except in two ongoing cases, the accusations of antisemitism have been rejected. The final two have yet to be substantiated. 

The findings demonstrate that the IHRA definition is undermining academic freedom and freedom of expression in relation to discussions of Israel and Palestine and risks being used in a way that discriminates against Palestinians and others on campuses who wish to teach, research, study, discuss, or speak out against the oppression of Palestinians.

The accusations have, in some cases, led to the cancellation of events that discuss the situation in Palestine and/or take a critical stance on Zionism, or the imposition of unreasonable conditions on the format of events. A common feature across several cases is the occurrence of significant and sustained levels of monitoring and surveillance by complainants including recording student speeches and staff lectures; monitoring student or staff social media posts; and reviewing academic publications, course syllabi and reading lists.

Staff and students who were subject to investigations and, in some cases, disciplinary hearings registered varying levels of stress and anxiety caused by these processes, despite being exonerated.

The reflections of one academic who went on leave due to stress are illustrative:

When you are in the process, you don’t understand how stressed you are. My nerves made me hyper vigilant for two years. The impact of the cases, continual media coverage, and constant communication to deal with the case resulted in chronic stress. 

Another targeted academic expressed concerns about their reputation and career:

I feel like I’m on this emotional roller-coaster. I feel like I won’t get a job anywhere else. If I apply for another job, they might not hire me. Not that they would think that I’m antisemitic but because they would want to avoid controversy. That’s the reality for me now. It’s different for the people whose investigations didn’t go public. Reputation is everything for academics.

One student explained how the accusations interfered with their studies and threatened their future education:

It was really difficult to hear that you might be kicked out of university. It was very hard for me to focus on my studies. I had to do re-sits in the summer, so I didn’t graduate until recently. I nearly didn’t get into Oxford. I missed the deadline by two months. If it wasn’t for Oxford being really flexible, I wouldn’t be sitting here right now.

These cases are creating a chilling effect among staff and students, deterring individuals from speaking about or organising events that discuss Palestine out of fear that they will be subject to complaints, or else will face considerable bureaucratic hurdles and even costly legal action. Academics employed on temporary contracts and students are particularly susceptible to self-censorship out of fear that any sort of accusations, even if not upheld, could jeopardise their future ability to obtain permanent employment or impact their mental health.

The authors of the report recommend that UK higher education institutions should rescind the adoption of the IHRA Definition of Antisemitism.

Neve Gordon, the Chair of BRISMES’s Committee on Academic Freedom and a professor of human rights law in the School of Law at Queen Mary University of London said: 

What has been framed as a tool to classify and assess a particular form of discriminatory violations of protected characteristics, has instead been used as a tool to undermine and punish protected speech and to punish those in academia who voice criticism of the Israeli state’s policies.

Giovanni Fassina, Director of the ELSC added: 

Not only does the documented pattern call into question the compliance of UK universities with their legal obligation to protect academic freedom and freedom of expression, but it is leading universities away from their core mission of nurturing critical thought, facilitating unhindered research, and encouraging wide-ranging debate.

Background

In 2016, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) adopted a working definition of antisemitism (‘the IHRA definition’), to which was appended a list of examples of antisemitism, several of which mention Israel, thereby conflating criticisms of the State of Israel, its policies, practices and political ideology with antisemitism. In practice, these examples have been used in UK higher education institutions to delegitimise points of view critical of Israel by making false accusations of antisemitism. 

As pointed out by one of the main drafters of the IHRA definition, Kenneth Stern, writing in The Guardian in 2019, “It was never intended to be a campus hate speech code”. 

While antisemitism exists within UK society and incidents of anti-Jewish prejudice occur in higher education institutions, just as in other institutional contexts, the findings of this new report provide concrete evidence that the IHRA definition of antisemitism is not fit for purpose. The history and instrumentalisation of the IHRA definition of antisemitism should be understood in a wider context of attacks on advocates for Palestinian rights, as explained in a previous report published by the ELSC. Additional resources produced in the USA and Canada demonstrate similar harmful consequences for the rights of advocates for Palestine, while several human rights organisations, like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have asked the UN to reject the IHRA definition because its use and implementation “chill and sometimes suppress non-violent protest, activism and speech”. Such misuse has also been criticised by the former UN Special Rapporteur on Racism E. Tendayi Achiume.

In the UK, other efforts are being deployed at the institutional level to try and undermine advocacy for Palestine. In June 2023, the government tabled a bill aimed at preventing public bodies from making investment decisions that align with their human rights responsibilities and obligations. The bill was designed to target, in particular, boycotts, divestment and sanctions of Israel and, therefore, the Palestinian-led BDS movement. In response, a coalition of more than 70 civil society organisations in the UK declared that this bill represents a further attack on freedom of expression. Human Rights Watch called the bill “the latest in a growing list of measures which fundamentally undermine free speech and democratic rights in the country.”

The British Society for Middle Eastern Studies (BRISMES) is the largest academic association in Europe focused on the study of the Middle East and North Africa. Through its Committee on Academic Freedom, it is committed to supporting academic freedom and freedom of expression, both within the region and in connection with the study of the region, both in the UK and globally. https://www.brismes.ac.uk/ 

The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) is the only organisation providing free legal support to individuals, groups and organisations advocating for Palestinian rights in Europe, including the UK. ELSC also documents incidents of repression and analyses and challenges the restrictive policies that result in shrinking space. https://elsc.support/

Categories
Press Release

BREAKING-New Report Reveals Human Rights Violations Resulting from IHRA Definition of Antisemitism 

Amsterdam, 6 June 2023 

Today, the European Legal Support Center (ELSC) launches its new report “Suppressing Palestinian Rights Advocacy through the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism – Violating the Rights to Freedom of Expression and Assembly in the European Union and the UK”. The report is the first case-based account of human rights violations resulting from the institutionalisation and application of the controversial IHRA definition by the European Union and the UK. The growing concerns about the negative human rights impact of the IHRA definition, have so far been ignored by the EU. 

The ELSC report is based on 53 recorded incidents between 2017 and 2022 in Germany, Austria and the UK, in which individuals, groups and organisations were accused of antisemitism based on the IHRA definition. All of the accused were targeted for advocating for Palestinian rights, denouncing Israel’s practices and policies and/or criticising Zionism as a political ideology. When legally challenged, most of these allegations of antisemitism were dismissed as unsubstantiated. 

Analysis of the cases reveals a highly problematic pattern in which the IHRA definition is being implemented. Although it is advertised and promoted as “non-legally binding”, the definition is increasingly used by public and private bodies as if it was law. As a result, the IHRA definition chills free speech and curtails freedom of assembly, resulting in self-censorship of individuals afraid to face allegations of antisemitism.  

As confirmed by the ELSC report, allegations of antisemitism invoking the IHRA definition are overwhelmingly aimed at Palestinians, Jewish activists and organisations advocating for Palestinian rights. This suggests the definition is being implemented in a discriminatory manner. Individuals who are targeted suffer a range of unjust and harmful consequences, including loss of employment and reputational damage. 

Dr Younes, Independent Researcher and (Policy) Writer in Germany, said: 

With the uncritical adoption at the political and academic level across Europe, it has become impossible to voice any critical opinion about Israeli policies in public or in academia without the risk of losing your job, contract, funding or future employment opportunities.

A student activist in a UK university reflected: 

I found that the IHRA definition was deployed as a distraction tactic, where routinely I felt burnt out defending the right to freedom of expression and solidarity with Palestine […] I had crippling anxiety of who I could even trust, as it felt like the IHRA definition was a mode of surveillance in my day-to-day life.

The ELSC report also criticises the European Commission for consistently ignoring and dismissing the growing human rights concerns about the IHRA definition, and for failing to take measures to prevent any adverse impact of it on fundamental rights. 

Giovanni Fassina, director at the ELSC, commented: 

It is time for the European Commission to acknowledge and address that the policy it has been promoting and implementing on the basis of the IHRA definition, both at EU and member state level, is highly detrimental to fundamental rights and that it is fostering anti Palestinian racism.

The ELSC urges the European Commission, as well as the governments, parliaments and public institutions in the EU Member States and the UK, to cease and revoke the endorsement, adoption, promotion and implementation of the IHRA definition. While addressing and enforcing policies to combat antisemitism, the legal obligation of public actors to respect and protect freedom of expression and freedom of assembly must be upheld. 

Currently, the United Nations is finalising its “Action Plan on monitoring antisemitism and enhancing a system-wide response”. Recently, the ELSC joined a letter of more than a hundred civil society organisations, urging UN Secretary-General Guterres and High Representative Moratinos not to adopt and apply the IHRA definition. In November 2022, 128 leading scholars in antisemitism, Holocaust Studies and related fields, warned the UN in a public statement against adopting the IHRA definition. In October 2022, the UN Special Rapporteur on Racism released a report sharply criticising the IHRA definition. 

——-

READ THE REPORT

Categories
Press Release

Two Muslim Women Take Lloyds Bank to Court for Discrimination

16 March 2023, London and Amsterdam

After being sanctioned for posting messages in support of Palestine on their internal work portal, two Muslim women are suing their employer for discrimination. Lloyds Bank PLC (“LBP” or “Lloyds”) is one of the biggest banks in the UK.

In May 2021, Affy and Aliya posted messages in support of the Palestinian people and criticising illegal Israeli policies on their internal online portal, a platform where social issues are often discussed between employees. At the time, the Israeli army was bombing the occupied Gaza Strip, an attack that resulted in the killing of 236 Palestinian civilians. Affy also expressed her desire for LBP to boycott HP, a company that provided servers to run the ID systems that Israel uses to restrict Palestinian movement, and raised concerns on the impact of this on LBP’s ethical business activity.

Lloyds decided to investigate Affy and Aliya about the posts. Findings of ‘gross misconduct’ were made against both women for breaching the Lloyds’ policies on professional integrity, personal integrity – which include rules about discrimination, harassment and abusive content – and doing business responsibly. They received written warnings which could remain on their records indefinitely and were both reported to the Financial Conduct Authority for failing ‘to act with due skill, care and diligence’.  

This has had serious consequences in Affy and Aliya’s personal and professional lives. Affy, was 21 at the time, lost a prestigious graduate role with a £60,000 starting salary as a result of Lloyds’ sanctions. Affy and Aliya both lost their annual bonuses. Both are anxious about their future careers and now fear reprisal for raising concerns about socially responsible business or speaking about Palestine.

To get these sanctions removed, and to defend the right to speak about Palestine, Affy and Aliya are taking LBP to court for discrimination.

We should all be freed from discrimination based on our beliefs or our opinions about a just cause. We are taking this legal fight to end discrimination in our workplace. said Aliya.

The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) is supporting Affy and Aliya in their legal fight to get their sanctions revoked and their professional reputations restored. Giovanni Fassina, the Director of the ELSC, comments:

We have taken on this case to defend Affy and Aliya’s rights to advocate for Palestinian rights in their workplace, including through education and actions around corporate complicity in human rights abuse. This case is a clear manifestation of anti-Palestinian racism, a form of discrimination that silences, excludes, and defames Palestinians and their allies with slander such as being inherently antisemitic, and a dangerous restriction of free speech.[1]

The ELSC launched a crowdfunding campaign to help both employees cover the costly legal fees of their lawsuit against Lloyds, one of the biggest banks in the UK. The costs are estimated to be at least £30,000.

Affy’s hearing is set to take place in June 2023 at the London Central Employment Tribunal. Aliya is in the process of applying to have her case adjoined to Affy’s.


[1] To read more about anti-Palestinian racism, see ACLA, Anti-Palestinian Racism: Naming, Framing and Manifestations, April 2022, available at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/61db30d12e169a5c45950345/t/627dcf83fa17ad41ff217964/1652412292220/Anti-Palestinian+Racism-+Naming%2C+Framing+and+Manifestations.pdf

Visual: CC Commons

Categories
Press Release

First step towards justice for Palestinian rights activist in Vienna sued over social media post

European Legal Support Center (ELSC), Amsterdam and Vienna, November 9, 2022

The Viennese administrative authority has discontinued proceedings brought against the BDS Austria activist, including a fine of up to 3.500€, which accused the activist of committing an administrative offence. The activist and their lawyer are hopeful that this verdict will compel the civil court to dismiss the pending SLAPP and lead to a full vindication of the activist’s rights.  

On 20 October 2022, in a positive turn of events, the administrative authority dismissed the proceedings brought against a BDS activist for posting a third-party photo of the famous “Visit apartheid” poster parodically emblazoned with the City of Vienna logo. The charges were initially brought on the grounds of the improper use of the City’s logo, a violation of the Administrative Offences Act which warranted a fine of up to €3.500.

The administrative authority based its sudden halt of the proceedings on section 45(1) of the Administrative Offences Act 1991 (VStG), which allows for a dismissal of proceedings where, among other things: the defendant is innocent, the offence is not reprehensible or the harm raised by the claim is not severe enough to justify the proceedings. Although the administrative authority was unable to specify any one of the reasons listed in section 45(1), the fact that it relied on this provision in the first place clearly shows that it understood the claim to be baseless.

In the meantime, the City of Vienna’s SLAPP against the activist for defamation is still ongoing.

Back in April 2022, a judge contestably upheld the SLAPP lodged by the City against the activist over the same post. In the submission, the City of Vienna complained that the sarcastic “Visit apartheid” statement associated with the City’s logo would amount to defamation and that the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement “incites to hatred against Israeli people”. The activist has appealed this decision.

In a letter sent in May 2022 to the Austrian authorities, four UN Special Rapporteurs had also expressed concerns about the City of Vienna’s anti-BDS resolution and the lawsuit that “may hinder the peaceful activities of human rights defenders committed to monitor and denounce human rights violations in occupied Palestine, shrinking the civic space available to them to express legitimate grievances”.

The latest victory may mark a turning point in this judicial saga. 

The activist’s lawyer, Elisabetta Folliero, welcomes the decision dated 20 October 2022:

It is very positive that the administration of the City of Vienna has reaffirmed the importance of the exercise of freedom of opinion, thus demonstrating that Viennese institutions still have willpower to tackle violations of fundamental human rights. We hope that the civil proceedings still pending will also have the same outcome. It is vital to reiterate that freedom of opinion, and freedom of boycott as its component, are essential in order to safeguard democracy.

The judgment on the appeal against the interim decision has not yet been issued, and a hearing for the civil lawsuit is yet to be set.

TAKE ACTION

Categories
Case Update Press Release

Four UN Special Rapporteurs Address Their Concerns to Austrian Authorities About Anti-BDS Resolution and Lawsuit Against Activist 

UN Special Rapporteur (SR) on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, SR on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, SR on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and SR on the situation of human rights defenders sent a communication to Austrian authorities, asking clarification on the City of Vienna’s anti-BDS resolution and the lawsuit the City filed against a BDS activist.  

In the communication sent on 20 May 2022, the SR raised their concerns about the resolution adopted in 2018, “which includes undue restrictions to the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and of association”. They further expressed “concern that the City of Vienna’s filing of a lawsuit against a member of BDS Austria may hinder the peaceful activities of human rights defenders committed to monitor and denounce human rights violations in occupied Palestine, shrinking the civic space available to them to express legitimate grievances”.  

The BDS Austria activist published a social media post showing a picture of the famous poster stating “Visit Apartheid” that was stuck on a billboard along with the official logo of the Municipality of Vienna. The post had the sarcastic caption “We are pleased that the City of Vienna also takes note of apartheid and publicly states it”.  In November 2021, the City of Vienna filed a SLAPP (Strategic lawsuit against public participation) against the activist on the grounds of defamation and unlawful use of the City’s logo. It claimed that the BDS movement “incites to hatred against Israeli people” and therefore being publicly associated with BDS would amount to defamation since “the designation of the situation in Israel/Palestine as an “Apartheid” constitutes damage to our reputation”. In a highly contestable decision delivered on 6 April 2022, the Commercial Court of Vienna endorsed the City’s lawsuit and ruled against the BDS activist. 

The SR are worried that “this judgement in the first instance consolidates the City of Vienna’s motion against the BDS movement”. The resolution, which falsely labels the BDS movement as “antisemitic”, was indeed invoked by the City in the lawsuit. As stated in a legal opinion commissioned by the ELSC and authored by Professors Xavier Dupré De Boulois, Eric David, Richard Falk and John Reynolds, the resolution infringes on the fundamental rights of freedoms of expression, association and assembly of Palestinian rights advocates. 

Moreover, the SR recalled the legality and legitimacy of the BDS movement: “we point out that expressing support for, or opposition to, BDS, is fully guaranteed by the rights to freedom of opinion, expression and association” enshrined in articles 19, 21 and 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and political Rights. They also cited the European Court of Human Rights milestone judgement Baldassi and Others v. France and positive case law confirming the right to BDS in France and Germany. The SR further added that “this is in line with the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA)” which “stipulates that ‘boycott, divestment and sanctions are commonplace, non-violent forms of political protest against states’.” 

On 8 July 2022, the Austrian authorities replied to the communication, failing to respond to most of the requests sent by the Special Rapporteurs. Instead, they reiterated their baseless and unfounded claims targeting BDS Austria: “Their movement’s campaigns are often referred to as antisemitic”. They stood firm in a problematic position that was observed in the context of the lawsuit against BDS Austria and that contradicts the freedom of expression and protection of human rights defenders. 

The reply of the Austrian authorities makes the legal battle of the activist even more necessary in order to challenge the suppression of Palestinian rights advocacy in Austria. The BDS activist appealed the Court decision and is ready, if necessary, to stand before the European Court of Human Rights to assert his fundamental right to freedom of expression, a right enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

SUPPORT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTSTAKE ACTION 

  • Donate to help the activist covering the legal fees 
  • Sign the petition co-sponsored by the ECCP to ask the Municipality of Vienna to stop its lawfare against BDS activists 

Read more about the case.

Categories
Case Update Press Release

New Course at Vienna Fine Arts Academy Signals Further Erasure of Palestinian Narrative

The ELSC expressly condemns the holding of a course that is likely to fuel insidious censorship of genuine anti-racist discourse.

In May 2022, Palestinian scholar Dr. Walaa Alqaisiya was hastily disinvited from the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts’ Spring Curatorial Programme: Art Geographies. While the Academy refused to apologise and to clarify the internal process that led to her censorship, Walaa and her supporters pushed back and obtained the withdrawal of the remainder of the event from the Academy’s premises.

Adding insult to injury, the Academy is now hosting a year-long course entitled “Antiantianti: Conflicts about Antiantisemitism and Antiracism in the Politicized Art World”. While Eduard Freudmann and Petja Dimitrova, the course organisers, purportedly intend to reflect on “develop[ing] practices of solidarity that are simultaneously anti-racist and anti-anti-Semitic”, the abstract manifestly misrepresents the Palestine solidarity movement. It states that, “for decades, the conflict served as a projection screen for a political left” and that “supporting the Palestinian cause was taken for granted”.

Moreover, the course organisers chose two subjects of study: Dr. Alqaisiya’s disinvitation and the dismantling of an artwork in this year’s documenta edition. Neither Dr. Alqaisiya nor any contributor to the documenta fifteen exhibition were contacted prior to the preparation of this course. By cherry-picking two isolated incidents, Freudmann and Dimitrova deliberately extricate them from their broader context and thereby exclude entire fragments of the events.

In particular, the full picture of racism, and specifically anti-Palestinian racism, which took place in both instances, is absent from the course description, and its importance is explicitly downplayed. Had the course organisers intended to engage in a fully informed discussion on anti-racism, the abstract should have referred to a comprehensive factual overview, including the accounts relating to Dr. Alqaisiya’s differential treatment and to the unabashed, systematic racism that occurred at documenta fifteen.

The course further intends to study “different definitions of racism and antisemitism”, which begs the question – will the IHRA working definition of antisemitism and its examples be used as a parameter for discussion? If so, the course would likely steer the conversation away from anti-racism by eliminating the Palestinian narrative in favour of a widely criticised definition of antisemitism that conflates legitimate criticism of the Israeli state with antisemitism. This equation is extremely harmful to the global struggle against racism and the just pleas of the oppressed Palestinian people.

A space must be provided in academia for the free expression of sentiments of Palestinian solidarity, without repression. The ELSC therefore strongly condemns the maintenance of this course under the preconceptions expressed in its abstract, which is likely to harm individuals who are already facing outrageous smears and attacks.


Photo: Academy of Fine Arts Vienna, Schillerplatz 3, 1st district of Vienna, Peter Haas / CC BY-SA 3.0

Categories
Press Release

Berlin Data Protection Authority Holds RIAS/MBR Accountable for Violating Dr. Younes’ Data Rights

On 16 May 2022, the Berlin Data Protection Authority (DPA) decided in favour of Dr. Anna Younes and issued a warning against VDK, representing RIAS Berlin and MBR. The two organisations had prepared a secret dossier on Dr. Younes, which aimed at identifying “her positions on Israel and BDS”. The dossier also framed her as supporter of terrorism, sexism and anti-Jewish racism and resulted in her disinvitation from a public event on anti-racism organised by Die Linke in November 2019. Furthermore, the DPA rejected RIAS/MBR’s claim and stated that they “did not have a serious scientific purpose” nor a journalistic one when preparing this dossier. After almost two years, the DPA finally found RIAS/MBR violated European data protection law (GDPR) and recognised Dr. Younes’ basic data rights as a German citizen. Further legal action will be taken.

Nearly two years after Dr. Younes filed a complaint to the Berlin Data Protection Authority (DPA), the DPA issued a final decision on RIAS/MBR’s duty to provide access to her data. This decision follows a months-long public media campaign as well as a lawsuit brought against the DPA for its inactivity, both designed to expedite the legal process and obtain reparation for the damage inflicted on Dr. Younes. This decision also comes after a first victory for Dr. Younes in the beginning of May 2022, as a district court ruled in her favour and RIAS/MBR disclosed a part of the information they collected on her – namely, the dossier, which had been leaked to Dr. Younes. RIAS/MBR state in their answer to the DPA that they collected information on Dr. Younes in order to “identify her positions on Israel and BDS.

The DPA’s decision finally upheld Dr. Younes’ right to obtain access to the personal data collected by RIAS/MBR as ensured by European and German data protection law. In so doing, it rejected RIAS/MBR’s claims that the covert data gathering and sharing pursued journalistic and research purposes, which would have entitled the organisations to an exemption from providing this information.

Indeed, the DPA found that RIAS/MBR failed to follow a scientific methodology and limited itself to creating a “compilation of publicly accessible facts without deriving any new findings on them”. The DPA further rejected the invocation of a journalistic privilege, considering that the dossier was “explicitly not intended for publication and thus cannot represent an indirect contribution to the formation of public opinion”.

For these reasons, the DPA held that RIAS/MBR had violated article 15(1) of the GDPR on the right of access by the data subject. In this regard, Dr. Younes and the ELSC welcome the DPA’s decision.

Nonetheless, the DPA deemed that the framing of the data and its private transmission of the dossier to Die Linke was lawful, without explaining the grounds for said surveillance in the first place. Nor did this decision take into consideration Dr. Younes’ right to reputation, to not be misrepresented as having an “Antisemitic attitude”. 

After more than two years, it is a relief that the DPA held RIAS/MBR MBR accountable, whose conduct amounts to surveillance. We welcome the DPA’s decision that RIAS/MBR cannot legitimate their conduct on pretences of journalism or an ostensible scientific activity. Nevertheless, we deeply disagree with the DPA that RIAS/MBR’s preparation and transmission of the dossier was legitimate, as this resulted in significant damage to Dr. Younes’ professional and personal reputation and sends a clear message to all Palestinians in Germany. We will appeal the decision.

Giovanni Fassina, Director of the ELSC.

Read more about the case and watch this video

Donate to support the case

Read and sign the support letter

Listen to the podcast featuring Dr Younes, Inna Michaeli and Alice Garcia (Advocacy and Communications Manager at ELSC)

Visual: © ELSC. CC Watermelon Emoji Icon on IconScout

Categories
Case Update Press Release

German Court Rules in Favour of Scholar Dr. Anna Younes in Digital Surveillance Case

European Legal Support Center (ELSC), Amsterdam and Berlin, May 17, 2022

On 6 May 2022, the Berlin District Court upheld Dr. Younes’ claims and ordered VDK – the German state-funded organisation that legally represents RIAS Berlin and MBR – to give Anna Younes access to data that the two civil society organisations had gathered on her and passed on to others. The information released so far reveals that RIAS and MBR have been collecting people’s personal data based on their “positions on Israel and BDS.”

In November 2019, RIAS and MBR created a secret dossier which depicted Dr. Younes as an anti-Jewish racist, terrorist sympathiser and sexist. The dossier was then sent to Katina Schubert, the head of the political party Die Linke/The Left in Berlin. This resulted in Dr. Younes’ exclusion from a public event organised by the party. This conduct infringed upon Dr. Younes’ right to privacy, freedom of expression, and academic freedom. RIAS/MBR’s actions amount to digital surveillance.

In March 2020, Dr. Younes, with the support of her lawyer and the ELSC, requested RIAS provide access to her personal data, based on data rights under EU Data Protection Law. RIAS/MBR refused. Therefore, she brought her case to the Berlin Data Protection Authority (DPA), and then to court. Additionally, she had to file two lawsuits at the beginning of April 2022, due to the non-processing of her case by the DPA.  

However, it was only after a public media campaign was launched and more than 1,000 scholars, organisations, artists, journalists and activists supported her, that the DPA finally acknowledged Dr. Younes’ right to access her data. On 2 May 2022, RIAS/MBR withdrew their original position that Dr. Younes had no right to access her data, released the secret dossier previously disseminated and finally acknowledged the merits of her claim. A few days later, the court also handed down its decision in favour of Dr. Younes.

Most importantly, RIAS/MBR admitted to collecting data on, “Dr. Younes’ positions on Israel and the BDS movement.” The latter is a classification that most likely derives from MBR/RIAS’ use of the contested “IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism”.

Dr. Anna Younes and the ELSC welcome the decision of the District Court and the reconciliatory reaction of the DPA. The ELSC expects the DPA to acknowledge that RIAS and MBR illegally passed the secret dossier on to Katina Schubert, which led to a violation of Dr. Younes’ privacy rights – amongst other things.

Following this victory, Dr. Younes and her lawyer will request damages in court as RIAS/MBR prevented her from accessing her information for approximately two years. It also remains to be clarified whether RIAS and MBR have been storing further data other than those revealed in the disseminated dossier. 

This is an important victory because organisations using the IHRA definition for the surveillance of Palestinian rights advocates will be required to provide access to the information they collect on individuals. We believe that this is not an isolated case and that there is a structural issue of profiling Palestinians and Palestinian rights advocates in Germany. This is what we intend to challenge further in court. This demeanour creates a chilling effect and limits democratic participation in public debate.” – Giovanni Fassina, Director of the ELSC.

Read more about the case and watch this video

Read and sign the support letter

Donate to support the case

Listen to the podcast featuring Dr Younes, Inna Michaeli and Alice Garcia (Advocacy and Communications Manager at ELSC)

Categories
Case Update Press Release

Viennese Court Endorses the City of Vienna’s SLAPP Against Palestinian Rights Advocate

European Legal Support Center (ELSC), Amsterdam and Vienna, April 13, 2022

In a highly contestable decision delivered on 6 April 2022 in the case between the City of Vienna and a member of BDS Austria, the Commercial Court of Vienna endorsed the City’s Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), ruling against the BDS activists. The Austrian activists will appeal this decision.

The judge ordered that the BDS activist must no longer use the logo of the City of Vienna in connection with any publication or public statement in order to avoid that the latter may be interpreted as issued by the City. The Court forbade the use of the City’s logo, although it was not proven in any way that the activist had ever done so.

The City sued the activist for publishing a sarcastic social media post that contained a picture of the famous “Visit Apartheid” poster attached to a billboard carrying the official logo of the City of Vienna. The City alleges that the BDS movement holds “antisemitic views” and “incites hatred against Israeli people”. Accordingly, it claimed that being publicly associated with BDS and with “the designation of the situation in Israel/Palestine as ‘Apartheid’ causes damage to [its] reputation”, and that this would therefore amount to defamation.

The judgement of the Vienna Court significantly deviates from prior judgments issued by the European Court of Human Rights, notably its judgment in Baldassi and Others v. France, as well as from emerging case law in Germany, all of which confirm the legitimacy of the Palestinian civil society-led BDS movement.

The Court’s decision is deeply problematic for the following reasons:

  1. The Court exclusively based its reasoning on the City’s documents, while disregarding the 22 pieces of evidence submitted on behalf of the BDS activist, including legal opinions of renowned international and Israeli scholars.
  2. The Court also ignored that the existence of an Israeli system of apartheid that oppresses the Palestinian people is a fact that has been meticulously documented by leading human rights organizations and UN experts, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B’tselem and the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
  3. It was clear from the BDS activist’s social media post that the apartheid poster did neither originate from the City nor express the views of the City. The activist’s post was not a factual assertion but rather satirical humour, which was taken out of context and used to silence advocacy for Palestinian rights.

The BDS activist intends to appeal the decision and is ready, if necessary, to stand before the European Court of Human Rights to assert his fundamental right to freedom of expression, a right enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Regarding next steps, the activist’s lawyer, Elisabetta Folliero, said:

My client wants to proceed with the appeal, which is crucial for the defence of the fundamental right to freedom of expression. The City’s claim of financial compensation for damages and the cost of the legal proceedings, which my client will be required to pay if the appeals court upholds this controversial judgement, has already a chilling effect on support for Palestinian rights in Austria. For this reason, we ask for solidarity, including donations, which will support our appeal.”

TAKE ACTION

Categories
Press Release

European States should adopt a Consistent Approach toward Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Palestine during Human Rights Council Session 49

The ELSC took part in a initiative led by the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) to ask key EU institutions and Member States to uphold the rule of international law and human rights for Palestinians at the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council. Read the press release of the CIHRS below.

The Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) and partners in Europe and Palestine wrote to key European Union (EU) institutions and Member States[1] and the United Kingdom (UK), urging them to uphold the rule of international law and human rights for the Palestinian people at the current 49th regular session of the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council. The letters noted the EU’s priorities in the UN Human Rights Fora in 2022, namely its commitment to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and the rule of law “consistently and coherently in all areas of its external actions” as well as the UK’s commitment to defend the rights and freedoms of the most oppressed and vulnerable around the world. The letters called on the states to reaffirm their longstanding commitment to international law and human rights standards by voting in favour of the three resolutions under agenda items 2 and 7 pertaining to accountability, human rights, illegal Israeli settlements, and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people.

CIHRS and partners urged the states to recognise and condemn the reality of Israel’s apartheid against the Palestinian people and all associated violations. The organisations also called on states to acknowledge, welcome and engage with the content of the final upcoming report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the oPt during the session, which will examine the crime of apartheid. In addition, CIHRS and partners called on states to support all existing relevant international accountability mechanisms, namely the UN Commission of Inquiry established in April 2021 and the UN database of businesses involved in Israel’s settlement enterprise – as a means to end the ongoing cycle of impunity granted to Israel.

Given Israel’s unsubstantiated designation of six prominent Palestinian human rights and humanitarian organisations as “terrorist” and “unlawful”, CIHRS and partners urged states to call on Israel to immediately revoke these designations and to ensure the continuity and protection of Palestinian civil society and human rights defenders. Furthermore, the communications urged states to call on Israel to immediately stop its annexation of Palestinian land and the expansion of its illegal settlement enterprise in occupied territory, cease the forcible transfer and displacement of protected persons, and end its policy of administrative detention and release all Palestinian political prisoners. During this Council session, the international community must urge Israel to immediately, fully and unconditionally lift its prolonged illegal closure and blockade of the Gaza Strip.


[1] The countries are: Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg and The Netherlands. In addition, a separate letter was sent to the EU delegations in Geneva, Brussels and Jerusalem.


See more on the CIHRS’s website.


Picture: Human Rights Council – 34th Session. UN Photo / Elma Okic

Categories
Press Release

A New European Citizens Initiative Aims to Push the EU to Ban Trade with Illegal Settlements

The ELSC joined a coalition of more than 100 organisations asking European citizens to sign the European Citizens Initiative that will push the EU to ban trade with illegal settlements and therefore align its policy with international law. See our press release below.

Brussels, 21 February 2022 – Marking the World Day of Social Justice on February 20 a coalition of more than 100 civil society organizations, has launched a European Citizens Initiative (ECI) to stop trade with illegal settlements in occupied territories. 

An ECI is an official instrument for democratic participation of citizens in EU policy making. If an ECI garners one million signatures from EU citizens over 12 months the European Commission must consider and debate the petition’s demands.  This ECI demands EU legislation that will outlaw trade with illegal settlements, anywhere and at all times, including trade with Israel’s illegal settlements in occupied Palestine. The coalition calls on every EU citizen concerned about human rights, social justice and fair trade to sign the petition.

Even though illegal settlements constitute a war crime under international law, the EU allows trade with them. In the case of Israel’s settlements, the UN Security Council has called on states to render them no assistance, and the European Union has repeatedly declared that they constitute a flagrant violation of international law. Nevertheless, the EU continues to trade with them, which has emboldened their ongoing expansion. 

Tom Moerenhout, a legal scholar and one of the initiators of the ECI: 

The EU has been shamefully inconsistent in its respect of the rule of law.  Indeed, the European Commission first rejected registration of our Citizens Initiative but had to change its position after we successfully sued the Commission before the European Court of Justice. The Commission has since acknowledged it can implement a general rule to stop illegal settlement trade that is considered a general measure in respect of international and EU law rather than a sanction.

This European Citizens Initiative is carried out by the #StopSettlements coalition, which includes prominent civil society organizations in the field of human rights, environmental and social justice, trade unions and politicians who unite against profits from annexation and occupation to protect human rights, fair trade, and international peace. 

SIGN and read the text of the petition

#StopSettlements contacts for media and groups & organizations wishing to join the Initiative:
Tom Moerenhout tom@stopsettlements.org
Aneta Jerska aneta@stopsettlements.org

Any question about the ECI or the #StopSettlements campaign? See our Q&A.

About the #StopSettlements Coalition : All information in the About Us section of the website. Also see the members here:

European/ International: 

Avaaz, European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine, European Legal Support Center, European Trade Union Network for Justice In Palestine, Human Rights Watch, Rābet

SumOfUs, Addameer, Al-Haq

Belgium :

Broederlijk Delen, 11.11.11 vecht mee tegen onrecht, Association Belgo-Palestinienne (ABP), CNCD 11.11.11, Coordination Nationale d’Action pour la Paix et la Démocratie (CNAPD), Le Monde Selon les Femmes, Ligue des Droits Humains, Solidagro, Vredesactie

France: 

Association France Palestine Solidarité , ATMF, CEDETIM, Chrétiens de la Méditerranée, Confédération paysanne, Ensemble!, Groupe d’amitié islamo-chrétienne, La CGT, La Cimade, Les Jeunes écologistes , Ligue des droits de l’Homme, Mouvement international de la Réconciliation – Branche française (M.R.), Mouvement pour une Alternative Non-violente (Mrap), Plateforme des ONG Françaises pour la Palestine , Une Autre Voix Juive, Union Juive Française pour la Paix, Union syndicale Solidaires 

Finland: 

Arabikansojen ystävyysseura (AKYS), ICAHD Finland, Psykologien Sosiaalinen Vastuu Ry, Rauhanliitto, Sadankomitea – Committee of 100 in Finland, Suomen Rauhanpuolustajat, Svensk Ungdom / RKP -nuoret, Vihreät nuoret

Germany: 

AK Nahost Berlin, Deutsch-Palästinensische Gesellschaft, Freunde von Sabeel Deutschland, Internationale Liga für Menschenrechte, Jüdische Stimme für gerechten Frieden in Nahost, Kairos Palestine Solidaritätsnetz Deutschland, Palästinakomitee Stuttgart, Palästina Spricht, pax christi Diözesanverband Rottenburg-Stuttgart, The Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) Deutschland 

Luxembourg: 

Comité pour une Paix Juste au Proche-Orient (CPJPO)

Ireland: 

Academics For Palestine (AFP), ActionAid Ireland, Centre for Global Education, Christian Aid Ireland, Comhlámh, Financial Justice – Ireland, Gaza Action Ireland (GAI), Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign-IPSC, Irish Muslim Peace & Integration Council (IMPIC), Justice For Palestine, Kaíros Íreland, National Union of Students – Union of Students in Ireland (NUS-USI), PalFest Ireland – Art/ festival Supporting Palestine, SADAKA (The Ireland Palestine Alliance), TCD Apartheid Free, Trade Union Friends of Palestine, Trócaire, Unite, Uplift – People Powered Change

Italy: 

Amici della Mezza Luna Rossa Palestinese (AMLRP), Arci, Artisti Resistenti, Associazione Amicizia Sardegna Palestina, Associazione di solidarietà internazionale, Assopace Palestina, Casa dei Diritti dei Popoli, Centre Nuovo Modello diSviluppo, Centre Studi Sereno Regis, Comitato Fiorentino “fermiamo la Guerra”, Confederazione dei Comitati di Base – COBAS, COSPE – Together For Change, Costituzione Beni Comuni, Cultura e Libertà, Donne en Nero, Fair watch, FIOM-CGIL, Fondazione Lelio e Lisli Basso – Onlus, Gazzella, Gruppo Empolese Emisfero Sud (G.E.E.S.), Il Chicco di Senape, Libera, Libere Tutte, Link – Coordinamento Universitario (LINK), Medicina Democratica, Memoria in Movimento, New weapons research group, Parallelo Palestina, Resistenza , Rete Ebrei Contro L’Occupazione, Salaam Ragazzi dell’Olivo, Salaam Ragazzi dell’Olivo – Comitato Di Trieste, Un ponte per, Una Città In Comune, WILPF

Slovenia:

Center za družbeno raziskovanje (Cedra), Danes je nov dan, Gibanje za pravice Palestincev, Humanitas, Mirovni inštitut, Proja, Sindikat žerjavistov pomorskih dejavnosti (SŽPD), Slovenska filantropija, 3MUHE Pravična trgovina Fair Trade

Spain:

Confederación Intersindical Galega, ELA Sindikatua, LAB

Other European:

Betlehems Venner (Denmark), Palestinagrupperna i Sverige (PGS) (Sweden) 


The ELSC has been involved in the ECI since its very initial stage, assisting the seven EU citizens in the preparation of the Initiative and with legal research and analysis throughout the proceedings before the European Court of Justice, when the European Commission refused first to register the ECI. Read more here.

Categories
Press Release

More and more German courts confirm the right to BDS

Time for German cities and the Bundestag to scrap their shameful anti-Palestinian resolutions

European Legal Support Center (ELSC), Amsterdam and Berlin, February 9, 2022

On January 20, Germany’s Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig confirmed that the City of Munich had violated the right to freedom of expression by denying the use of its conference hall solely because it did not like the particular theme of the planned event. The Court instructed the City to provide its hall for a public debate of Munich’s anti-BDS resolution. The ELSC commends the judges of Germany’s highest administrative court for this principled decision, which represents yet another milestone in efforts to put an end to Germany’s unethical and unlawful anti-BDS resolutions.

The decision of Germany’s highest administrative court in Leipzig comes in a context in which activists for Palestinian human rights have to turn to the courts to defend their constitutional rights to freedom of expression and assembly against their cities, which seek to impose the anti-BDS resolutions adopted by local and regional parliaments, as well as the German Bundestag.

Since 2019, at least seven German courts have consistently upheld the right of activists to use public facilities for BDS-related events. In eight decisions, the Munich Regional Court, the administrative courts of Oldenburg, Lower Saxony, Cologne, Hesse, Bavaria and, most recently, Leipzig have convicted the cities of Oldenburg, Bonn, Frankfurt and Munich for violating the constitutional rights to equality, freedom of expression and assembly, instructing the cities to provide the requested public facilities.

In light of these court decisions, German municipal bodies should respect these constitutional rights and ensure equal access to public venues for activists for Palestinian rights. Nevertheless, promoters of Germany’s anti-Palestinian policies, including the federal antisemitism commissioner Felix Klein, continue to push for more of the same restrictive measures, claiming that German cities may lawfully deny public spaces for BDS-related activities, because decisions of administrative courts, including the recent decision of the federal court in Leipzig, apply to the respective specific cases and circumstances only.

In terms of legal efforts, the step ahead is, therefore, a principled challenge of the constitutionality of the anti-BDS resolutions that underpin the restrictive measures of German cities. At least 13 such anti-BDS resolutions – which, based on the false accusation of antisemitism, call for withholding public spaces and subsidies from groups and activities related to the Palestinian civil society-led BDS movement –  have been adopted since 2017 by the parliaments of Frankfurt, Munich, Berlin, Cologne, Dortmund, Bochum, Bonn, Leipzig and Bielefeld, the countries of Baden-Württemberg, Thuringia and North Rhine-Westphalia, and the federal Bundestag.

German administrative courts have already ruled that these anti-BDS resolutions are no more than an expression of will, do not have legal standing and can, thus, not justify the restriction of an existing legal right. The Constitutional Court of North-Rhine Westphalia, moreover, has confirmed that the legality of these resolutions may by challenged in constitutional courts, when procedures are exhausted in administrative courts.

Since the Bundestag’s anti-BDS resolution of 2019, activists of the initiative ‘Bundestag 3 for Palestine’ have been insulted as antisemitic and unlawfully excluded from many public spaces in German cities. A Jewish member of the initiative was even compared to the antisemitic murderer of Halle by the antisemitism commissioner and Uwe Becker, board member of the German-Israeli Society DIG. With its recent decision, the Federal Administrative Court now supports BT3P’s lawsuit against the Bundestag, because it ruled conclusively that public space bans because of support for BDS are illegal.

Ahmed Abed, Lawyer of the Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P)

***

For more on these German court decisions, read: German Case Law: A coherent Set of Principles for Challenging anti-BDS resolutions.

Support our legal work against German anti-BDS resolutions and support the Bundestag 3 for Palestine in their legal battle against the Bundestag’s anti-BDS resolution.

For more information, contact us: info@elsc.support

Categories
Press Release

Report reveals a pattern of attempts at silencing Palestinian rights advocates in the Netherlands

Nederlandse versie

Today, the European Legal Support Center (ELSC), an organisation that monitors incidents of repression against Palestinian rights advocates in Europe and provides them with legal support, published a report on chilling Palestinian rights advocacy in the Netherlands. The report, which is the first of its kind ever published, highlights the many attempts to stifle activism, human rights work, artistic activities or simple political expression on Israel and the Palestinian people.

The report highlights how, as the public awareness and criticism of illegal Israeli policies directed against the Palestinian people grew in the 21st century, the Israeli government launched a global campaign to silence voices critical of its policy. With the help of supporters in think tanks, advocacy groups, political allies and some media, the efforts to stifle domestic critique of Israeli policies and advocacy for Palestinian rights intensified and took the form of tactics that follow similar patterns, as shown in the report.

Research in the report is based on 76 incidents of attacks on Palestinian rights advocacy that happened between 2015 and 2020 in the Netherlands, primarily targeting individuals – including activists, NGO staff, journalists, professors, politicians – and civil society organisations. Examples of cases in the report show (attempted) defunding, denial of space, restriction of academic freedom, threats with violence or cyberattacks, threats with lawsuits, and smear campaigns that baselessly conflate legitimate criticism of policies and solidarity initiatives with antisemitism or support to terrorism. These attacks have had immediate impacts on the targeted people’s reputation, mental health and resources, but also longer term effects such as intimidation and self-censorship.

Despite the broad civic space provided by the institutions in the Netherlands, and even though the attacks often don’t succeed, the report exposes a genuine chilling effect and an environment in which Palestinian rights advocates can be attacked for exercising their fundamental rights. Among the perpetrators are well identified actors such as Israel-advocacy groups, specific media outlets and right-wing and Christian political parties, but also centrist parties or mainstream media that plays an important role in enabling and amplifying the disinformation and/or attacks of the primary actors, as stated in the report.

Compared to other countries in Europe such as Germany or the UK, the Netherlands has a relatively favourable environment for advocating for Palestinian rights and upholding freedom of expression. But many of the attacks and incidents against human rights defenders that we have been monitoring could be avoided if the government was opposing harder the smear campaigns and pressure from Israel-advocacy groups.” said Giovanni Fassina, the Programme Director of the ELSC.

The report calls on the Dutch government and other public institutions such as universities or city councils to comply more proactively with their positive obligation to protect civic space. Members of Parliament and civil society have a particular duty and leverage towards the government in that regard, and media, donors and financial services providers also bear their own responsibilities in the observed shrinking space for open and democratic debate.

Read the reportDutch version / See an infographic of the main findingsDutch version

The European Legal Support Center was established in 2019 in Amsterdam as the first organisation to defend and empower the Palestine solidarity movement in Europe, including the UK, through legal means. The ELSC provides free legal advice and assistance to associations, NGOs, groups and individuals advocating for Palestinian rights in Europe. Press contact: Alice Garcia, alice@elsc.support.

Categories
Press Release

Israeli Product Centre Fined for the Mislabelling of Products from the Occupied Palestinian Territory

On Friday 9 April, the Israeli Products Centre (IPC) based in Nijkerk, The Netherlands, received a fine of €2100 from the Dutch Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) for mislabeling products originating from Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt). The ELSC previously assisted the Dutch group docP who led a campaign for the IPC to correctly label products from the oPt but also to stop the trade in settlement products altogether, when they received a letter threatening legal action for their advocacy efforts. We welcome the decision of the NVWA as an important signal showing that activists who work for the respect of international law cannot be restricted by threats of legal action aimed at silencing Palestinian advocacy.

The present fine was issued following a campaign by docP in February 2020 calling on individuals to submit a complaint to the NVWA to investigate the IPC for the possible mislabeling of products, particularly wine and cosmetics containing Dead Sea salt. The IPC, an initiative of the Dutch Christians for Israeli foundation, which aims to encourage trade with Israel, has previously promoted the sale of mislabeled settlement products. The docP campaign highlighted that, following the 2019 Psagot judgement of the Court of Justice of the EU, products within the EU common market originating from the oPt are required to be labelled as being made in an “occupied territory” and an “Israeli settlement”. Without such labelling, products may evade import taxes as products made in the illegal Israeli settlements fall outside of preferential trade agreements concluded by the EU and Israel.

Following the campaign led by docP, the IPC was investigated by Dutch authorities who acknowledged that their labelling did not meet the legal requirements. The IPC revised labels on the products from Israeli settlements in the oPt to state that the products were “coming from an Israeli village in Judea and Samaria”. DocP continued their campaign to ensure the products were correctly labelled as originating from an Israeli settlement in occupied territory in accordance with Dutch and EU law. The recent fine reflects the success of this campaign and is an important step in ensuring consumers and tax authorities can clearly identify products originating from illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian land. 

The ELSC assisted in the present case after the IPC threatened to sue docP for defamation due to their advocacy work. With the assistance of the ELSC, docP sent a letter to the NVWA and Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service (FIOD) to clarify the legal basis for the accusation of mislabelling and that the evasion of import duties was a suspicion, not a proven fact. In response, lawyers for the IPC stated that they were considering legal action, however, no further action was taken.

We welcome the decision of the NVWA as it not only ensures respect for Dutch and international law but also shows that advocates for Palestinian rights will not stand down when threatened due to their human rights work.

To read docP’s Press Release, click here

For further information on this case, click here

For further information on EU labelling requirements from products from Israeli settlements, click here