ECCHR PROVIDES EXPERT OPINION
EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE REVIEWS TERRORISM LIST AGAIN
The
European Court of Justice in Luxembourg must take a stand on the new EU
Terrorism List. While the trials to date have concerned aggrieved parties who
have contested their inclusion on the list, this time it concerns a preliminary
question submitted to the European Court by the Düsseldorf Higher Regional
Court. The ECCHR has put their expert opinion forth in the case.
The case in the current criminal trial in Düsseldorf revolves around two alleged fundraisers for the Turkish DHKP-C organization, which is currently on the EU Terrorism List. The activists were accused, among other charges, of accepting and transferring funds under the Foreign Trade and Payments Law, which clearly states that financial support of organizations listed on the EU Terrorism List and thus under EU sanctions, can be held criminally accountable.
Until now, however, every lawsuit before the European Court of Justice against those who found themselves on the EU Terrorism List has concerned attempts to remove the respective individuals from the list. Reasons for this included systematic infringements on the right to defense, and particularly the right to a fair trial, the right to a judicial hearing, as well as the protection of property.
The ECCHR's expert opinion report addressed these shortcomings of listing individuals and organizations, as well as the inability of the Terrorism List to act as a foundation for German criminal liability: the decisions, with which individuals and groups are included in the list are unlawful and therefore invalid. The ECCHR stressed in detail that the EU must strive towards respecting all judicial rights (including the right to fair trial) of the affected parties. It is particularly important to consider this in the face of the immense economic, financial, and societal consequences to an individual that is listed.
The ECCHR's expert opinion went further to state that a decision to list an individual/organization based on a procedural error could not be the basis of a criminal trial. Every six months, these decisions undergo partial alteration in form and with their altered contents are approved by the European Council. Due to these constant changes to the decisions and the fact that the Foreign Trade and Payments Law also undergoes perpetual alteration, a citizen cannot predict the legal consequences of his or her actions thus making him or herself vulnerable to criminal prosecution. Such criminal liability infringes on the fundamental rule of the certainty of law. Accordingly, the elements of an offense must be sufficiently and precisely formulated and the legal consequences of a person's actions must be known to him or her.
With this inquiry submission through the Düsseldorf Regional Court, the European Court of Justice now has the opportunity to go beyond this particular case to end the Terrorism List trials, which are in violation of fundamental human rights. It can also advise the EU Parliament to begin a new trial that corresponds to constitutional and human rights principles.
The case in the current criminal trial in Düsseldorf revolves around two alleged fundraisers for the Turkish DHKP-C organization, which is currently on the EU Terrorism List. The activists were accused, among other charges, of accepting and transferring funds under the Foreign Trade and Payments Law, which clearly states that financial support of organizations listed on the EU Terrorism List and thus under EU sanctions, can be held criminally accountable.
Until now, however, every lawsuit before the European Court of Justice against those who found themselves on the EU Terrorism List has concerned attempts to remove the respective individuals from the list. Reasons for this included systematic infringements on the right to defense, and particularly the right to a fair trial, the right to a judicial hearing, as well as the protection of property.
The ECCHR's expert opinion report addressed these shortcomings of listing individuals and organizations, as well as the inability of the Terrorism List to act as a foundation for German criminal liability: the decisions, with which individuals and groups are included in the list are unlawful and therefore invalid. The ECCHR stressed in detail that the EU must strive towards respecting all judicial rights (including the right to fair trial) of the affected parties. It is particularly important to consider this in the face of the immense economic, financial, and societal consequences to an individual that is listed.
The ECCHR's expert opinion went further to state that a decision to list an individual/organization based on a procedural error could not be the basis of a criminal trial. Every six months, these decisions undergo partial alteration in form and with their altered contents are approved by the European Council. Due to these constant changes to the decisions and the fact that the Foreign Trade and Payments Law also undergoes perpetual alteration, a citizen cannot predict the legal consequences of his or her actions thus making him or herself vulnerable to criminal prosecution. Such criminal liability infringes on the fundamental rule of the certainty of law. Accordingly, the elements of an offense must be sufficiently and precisely formulated and the legal consequences of a person's actions must be known to him or her.
With this inquiry submission through the Düsseldorf Regional Court, the European Court of Justice now has the opportunity to go beyond this particular case to end the Terrorism List trials, which are in violation of fundamental human rights. It can also advise the EU Parliament to begin a new trial that corresponds to constitutional and human rights principles.