ECJ upholds EU terror blacklists

European human rights law is automatically overruled by rulings of the UN Security Council, EU judges have ruled.

EU terror finance blacklists have been upheld by the European Court of Justice in a preliminary ruling on Wednesday.

The Luxembourg court found that the EU is competent to order the freezing of an individual’s funds in the fight against international terrorism. 

The measures fall outside the scope of judicial review and European rights law “in so far as they are required by the UN Security Council”.

“The Court of First Instance finds that, according to international law, the obligations of the member states of the UN… prevail over any other obligation, including their obligations under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and fundamental freedoms and under the EC Treaty.” 

“This paramountcy extends to decisions of the Security Council,” states the ECJ judgement.

EU judges also ruled that the post-September 11 measures do not infringe "universally recognised fundamental human rights".

Individuals involved in the case claimed that individual human rights had been breached: the right to dispose of possessions, the right to defence and the right to an effective judicial remedy.

“The court finds that the freezing of funds provided for by the contested regulation does not infringe the applicants’ fundamental rights,” stated the ECJ.

“Nor have the applicants been arbitrarily deprived of their right to property… the UN’s [measure] is a precautionary measure which, unlike confiscation, does not affect the very substance of the right of the persons concerned to property in their financial assets but only the use thereof.”

The EU courts also found that preventative measures could be used without informing individuals or allowing them a hearing.

“Since the regulation is a precautionary measure restricting the availability of property, observance of the fundamental rights of the persons concerned does not require the facts and evidence adduced against them to be communicated to them.”

“The court finds furthermore, that [EU] institutions were not required to hear the persons concerned, given that they had no discretion in the implementation of the sanctions decided by the Security Council,” said EU judges.

“As regards the right to effective judicial review, the court states that, in respect of the action brought by the applicants, it has carried out a complete review of the lawfulness of the contested regulation.”

Wednesday’s ruling on two cases could set the precedent for ten or more challenges that remain to measures to freeze bank accounts alleged to be linked to the Taliban, Al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden.

EU measures – taken at the level of European councils of ministers – have as a source a series of UN Security Council resolutions since 1999.

The resolutions request all UN member states, in Europe coordinated by EU action, to freeze the funds of people named in a blacklist.

Europe enacted and amended measures via the council of EU ministers annexing a list of people whose bank accounts must be frozen by member states.

The current list is regularly updated by the European Commission so as to conform with lists established by a UN Security Council Sanctions Committee.

• Previous article
• Next article