Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976?Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. Unless you are in this field of investigative journalism, especially covering extremely sensitive subjects and potentially dangerous subjects as well, you simply cannot understand the complexities and difficulties involved with this work that I face every day.
Monday, September 22, 2014
Arab Bank Found Liable for Hamas Terrorist Attacks
Arab Bank Found Liable for Hamas Terrorist Attacks
By Erik Larson and Christie SmytheSep 22, 2014 7:10 PM ET
Arab Bank Plc, the biggest lender in Jordan, helped Hamas militants
carry out a wave of violence in Israel that killed and wounded hundreds
of Americans, a New York jury decided in the first trial of its kind in
the U.S.
The Amman-based lender was found liable for doing
business with more than 150 Hamas leaders and operatives in the early
2000s, helping finance about two dozen deadly suicide bombings,
including attacks on crowded restaurants and buses in Tel Aviv and
Jerusalem, jurors decided yesterday in federal court in Brooklyn, New York.
“The
verdict is an incredible message that should be understood and heard by
the entire financial community -- if you do business with terrorists,
you can be held liable in the United States,” Michael Elsner, one of the
plaintiffs lawyers, said in a phone interview.
The case
highlights the ways banks can play a role in funding terrorist groups
and the extent to which they can be held responsible for monitoring
their customers, even those who aren’t on government lists of
terrorists. Credit Lyonnais SA and Bank of China Ltd. are facing similar cases in the U.S., alleging they served as conduits for terrorism financing.
David Miller, a former Manhattan
prosecutor who worked on terrorism cases for the U.S. Justice
Department and isn’t involved in the Arab Bank case, said the verdict
may result in follow-up lawsuits.
Photographer: Mohammed Abed/AFP via Getty Images
A Palestinian militant from the Ezzedine al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas' armed wing, attends... Read More
The
outcome sends “a powerful message to financial institutions of their
continuing obligation to know their customers,” said Miller, now a
lawyer at Bingham McCutchen LLP in New York.
300 Victims
The
plaintiffs, about 300 victims of the attacks or their relatives, are
seeking unspecified money damages from Arab Bank that will be decided at
a separate proceeding. The trial was the first against a bank on civil
claims of violating the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act, making the verdict a
potential industry landmark.
“There’s a huge sense of relief -- it is an amazing verdict,” said Joshua Faudem, a 39-year-old Detroit
native who was injured in a suicide attack on Mike’s Place bar in Tel
Aviv on April 30, 2003. “This is a huge wake-up call, not just for
banks, but for all big businesses, to wash their hands of these kinds of
clients.”
The verdict was handed down the same day a federal
appeals court in Manhattan revived a similar suit filed by about 200
Hamas victims against National Westminster Bank, accused of maintaining
accounts and transferring money for an alleged Hamas fundraiser, the
Palestine Relief & Development Fund.
The court reversed a
lower-court dismissal of the suit, filed in Manhattan federal court,
ruling that it had used the wrong standard to determine whether NatWest,
a unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, knew it was supporting a terrorist organization.
Not Over
“Obviously
this case is a long way from over,” U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan,
who oversaw the Arab Bank case, said to lawyers after the verdict was
delivered yesterday. “We have not finished our work by a long shot.”
The
victims linked Arab Bank to 24 terror attacks, including a suicide
attack on Holocaust survivors celebrating Passover at the Park Hotel in
Netanya, Israel, in 2002, which killed about 30 people and wounded more than 100.
A
jury of eight women and three men deliberated fewer than two days
before reaching the decision that the bank was liable on all 24 counts
linked to the separate attacks.
Arab Bank will appeal the
verdict because the judge’s instructions were “erroneous” and mistakes
were made in determining which evidence would be allowed, Shand
Stephens, a lawyer for the bank, said after the verdict.
Will Appeal
“The
plaintiffs evidence in this case is a mile wide and an inch deep,”
Stephens told reporters outside the courtroom. “The Second Circuit is
going to reverse this,” he said referring to the appeals court in New
York.
The events at the center of the trial took place during
the Second Intifada, a five-year Palestinian uprising in Israel that
began in 2000 and resulted in thousands of deaths, including hundreds of
civilians on both sides of the conflict. Non-U.S. victims were barred
from joining the case.
Lawyers for Arab Bank told jurors during
closing arguments on Sept. 18 that the lender followed international
banking rules and that most of the accused customers weren’t designated
as terrorists by the U.S., the United Nations or the European Union. The
only customer who was a designated terrorist, Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed
Yassin, slipped through the bank’s systems due to a spelling error, the
lender argued.
Bank Paymaster
Victims also targeted
the bank’s business relationship with The Saudi Committee for the
Support of Intifada Al Quds, which was formed to pay the costs of the
uprising. The organization used the Arab Bank as a “paymaster” to pass
on stipends of more than $5,000 to families of suicide bombers and other
terrorists, according to the plaintiffs.
Shukry Bishara, the
Palestinian finance minister and a former executive at Arab Bank,
testified on Sept. 11 that the lender made payments in the Palestinian
territories to provide humanitarian relief, not compensate families of
suicide bombers.
Witnesses for the plaintiffs testified that
Hamas was probably behind all the attacks at issue in the case, which
included deadly 2001 bombings at a beach-front discotheque in Tel Aviv
and a Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem,
as well as the 2003 bombing of a bus carrying families returning from
prayers at Jerusalem’s Western Wall, also known as the Wailing Wall.
Others Responsible
Other
militant groups in the region claimed responsibility for some of the
attacks and may have been responsible, lawyers for the bank said in
questioning the witnesses. Hamas was designated a terrorist group by the U.S. in 1997.
Arieh
Spitzen, the former head of the Israeli military’s Department of
Palestinian Affairs, told jurors in August that the bank transferred
about $4 million from 2000 to 2001 to as many as two dozen Hamas leaders
and operatives through its New York branch.
Spitzen said he was
only able to review limited account information because the bank
refused to hand over much of the data. The bank has argued it couldn’t
supply more comprehensive information without violating criminal laws of
Jordan,
Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. A federal judge ruled jurors
could be told to infer from the bank’s failure to provide the
information that it did business with terrorists, giving the plaintiffs a
potential edge.
Supreme Court
Arab Bank fought all
the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to resist sanctions over its refusal
to provide the account records to victims. In June, the high court
rejected the bank’s appeal.
Arab Bank Chairman Sabih Al Masri,
testifying for the company, said the attacks “destroyed opportunities
for peace” and denied ever hearing that the bank supported terrorism. Al
Masri, who took over management of Arab Bank in 2012 after former
Chairman Abdul Hamid Shoman resigned, told jurors his brother was killed
by a terrorist and his own life had been threatened because a company
he owns supplied food to U.S. troops in the Middle East.
The
bank said a verdict for the plaintiffs would “undermine” the compliance
systems used by financial institutions throughout the world and would
“create vast uncertainty and risk.”
Founded in Jerusalem in 1930, Arab Bank grew to a network of 600 branches in 30 countries, according to its website.
Committed to rebuilding the Palestinian economy, it “emerged as the
main vehicle for the payments by the international donor community,”
Bishara said in a court filing.
The bank opened a branch in New York in 1982, according to Bishara. In 2005, it agreed,
without admitting wrongdoing, to pay a $24 million penalty to U.S.
regulators over alleged failure to enact sufficient controls and
adequately manage risks of money laundering and terrorist financing.
Inactive Branch
The
branch is no longer considered active, according to the U.S. Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation website. The bank said in a financial
report that it converted the branch to a different form of office with
limited operations.
The penalty was a “great disappointment to
Arab Bank,” Bishara said in a 2005 statement. He said the bank agreed to
pay the penalty “in order to put this matter behind us.”
The case is Linde v. Arab Bank Plc, 04-cv-02799, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn).
To contact the reporters on this story: Erik Larson in New York at elarson4@bloomberg.net; Christie Smythe in Brooklyn at csmythe1@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net; Andrew Dunn at adunn8@bloomberg.net Peter Blumberg
divorce attorneys virginia
ReplyDeletedivorce attorneys vero beach
divorce attorneys valdosta ga
divorce attorneys visalia ca
divorce attorneys victorville ca
divorce attorneys va beach
divorce attorneys virginia beach
divorce attorneys waxahachie tx
divorce attorneys youngstown ohio
divorce attorneys yuma az
divorce attorneys yakima washington
divorce attorneys yukon oklahoma
divorce attorneys yuba city ca
divorce attorneys youngstown oh
divorce attorneys yakima wa
divorce attorneys york county sc
divorce attorneys yonkers ny
divorce attorneys zanesville ohio
divorce attorneys zimbabwe
divorce attorney zionsville indiana