EU to appeal ruling that Hamas should be off terror list

Products from Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories must be labelled, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on Tuesday (12 November), in a move that provoked an angry response from pro-Israel lobbyists.

The EU said on Monday (19 January) it would appeal against an EU court ruling that the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas should be removed from the bloc’s terrorist list.

The move was criticised by Hamas, but welcomed by Israel, which had condemned last month’s decision by the bloc’s second-highest tribunal that the executive had failed to make its case for blacklisting the movement that controls the Gaza Strip.

“The EU decision reflects well the position that Hamas was and remains a terror organization,” the Israeli foreign ministry said in a statement.

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini noted in a statement that the General Court made its ruling on procedural grounds. As a result of the appeal, Hamas will remain on the EU’s terrorism list and its assets will remain frozen pending a judgment by the Court of Justice, the highest legal authority.

The General Court found that the decision to sanction Hamas, which Israel holds responsible for years of violence against it, was based on media reports, not considered analysis.

The EU will challenge the General Court’s finding that the EU must provide evidence that Hamas remains a terrorist group when it updates its terror list as well as the argument that the EU cannot use evidence from the Internet, an EU official said.

Mogherini said the EU was also studying “other appropriate remedial actions” it could take to avoid similar court decisions in future removing groups from the terrorism list.

Gaza on his mind. Brussels anti-war demo, July 2014.

“The fight against terrorism remains a priority for the European Union. In this sense, the EU is determined to stem the financing of terrorism, for which EU autonomous measures are an essential tool,” she said.

When the EU High Court judgment was released, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he was not satisfied with the EU’s explanation that the removal of Hamas from its list of terrorist organisations is a “technical matter”.

“The burden of proof is on the European Union and we expect it to put Hamas back on the list forthwith, given that it is understood by all that Hamas — a murderous terrorist organisation, the covenant of which specifies the destruction of Israel as its goal — is an inseparable part of this list.”

In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said the EU appeal “reflects the European bias to the Israeli occupation and it provides the occupation with a legitimacy to kill Palestinian civilians”.

However, noting criticism of Israel by European governments, he said Hamas believed the EU executive was out of step with its member states.

Hamas is formally sworn to Israel’s destruction and rejects peace talks that the rival Fatah faction of Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has conducted with Israel because they do not envisage Palestinian statehood in all of historic Palestine. Hamas has fought several wars with Israel since seizing power from Fatah in Gaza in 2007.

So far, no date was set for a decision by the the Court of Justice. It takes up to 18 months to rule on appeals.

The European Court of Justice ordered on 17 December that Hamas be removed from the EU list of terrorist organisations, giving member states three months to provide evidence to review the ruling.

The Court said the original listing of the group that governs the Palestinian territory of Gaza had been flawed and based on conclusions derived from the media and internet, not sound legal rulings.

The Luxembourg-based court added in a statement that today’s decision was based on procedural errors and did “not imply any substantive assessment of the question of the classification of Hamas as a terrorist group”.

However, the EU court said it was nevertheless maintaining the effects of the measures in order to ensure that any possible future freezing of funds would be effective.

Subscribe to our newsletters