Arab Bank ruling’s big implications

In a historic victory for American victims of terrorist attacks in Israel, a jury in Brooklyn federal court found the Jordan-based Arab Bank guilty of knowingly funding Hamas-affiliated individuals and organizations during the Second Intifada. The civil court decision will now proceed to the damages phase, in which a decision could spell significant compensation for the roughly 300 victims of terrorism and their relatives who filed the lawsuit.

But more tellingly, the case, which asserted violations by the Arab Bank of the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act, could affect policies by banks worldwide.

 “Congress adopted the Anti-Terrorism Act for the specific purpose of giving American victims and their families the opportunity to bring litigation against terrorists and their funders,” said one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, Richard Heideman, an international human rights lawyer with the Washington, D.C.-based firm Heideman Nudelman and Kalik.

Now, “every terrorist group, every terrorist supporter, and every funder of terrorism is on notice that the U.S. judicial system will protect the right of the American victims to seek recovery, hold those [terrorists] fully accountable, and gain justice through our American courts,” Heideman said.

After 10 years of back-and-forth litigation, a jury unanimously agreed that the Arab Bank knowingly provided material support and funding to individuals and organizations that led to 24 terrorist attacks by Hamas in Israel from 2001 to 2004.