The Role of US Styled Anti-Terrorism Litigation in the Prevention of Terrorism and Other Hybrid Threats – A Legal Assessment and Outlook

Abstract

Global terrorist activities depend directly on financial economic support from a multitude of donors, both individual and corporate. Terrorist financing is a global problem which is closely linked to international crimes such as money laundering and organized crime. Consequently, possible responses have to constitute co-ordinated, multi-lateral and multi faceted actions under the umbrella of a wide range of international stakeholders such as the United Nations Security Council and the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Apart from “kinetic” (kill) security responses and the adoption of criminal justice measures another response could be the use of transnational civil litigation by victims of terrorism against both, terrorist groups and their sponsors. Corporations, both profit and non profit, such as banks (cf. the US Arab Bank cases and the In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 case) and other entities (cf. the Boim litigation cases), as well as individuals, collude as aiders and abettors by providing financial assistance to the perpetrators (cf. UN Consolidated List established and maintained by the 1267 Committee with respect to Al-Qaida et al). Such collusion in acts of terrorism gains additional importance against the background of so called “Hybrid Threats” referring to new threats arising from multi-level threat scenarios. This article discusses the potential of the evolving notion of indirect corporate accountability under US federal law for aiding and abetting of acts of terrorism and other serious human rights crimes from a UK-Israeli perspective. This article acknowledges the interdependence of the different responses to terrorism, the potential disastrous impact on humanitarian action if unregulated and argues for the adoption of a holistic approach to combat terrorism.