[ad_1]
The association filed a petition against the bank alleging “baseless persecution” but, as mentioned above, the judge was not convinced and accepted the NAB’s position, rejected the petition and authorized the bank to freeze the association’s accounts while apportioning legal costs to the association.
“The association did not prove to the bank that funds were not transferred to the families of terrorists, whether they were terrorist prisoners, or terrorists killed in terrorist acts, or people who committed terrorist acts, and this was during wartime,” Judge Gaffman explained in his decision. He also noted that “the association’s CEO also admitted during the investigation that he had not personally visited the 3,000 families in the Palestinian Authority and in any case he was not personally aware that none or some of these families were linked to terrorism.”
The ruling also states that “the balance of convenience also does not favour the association.” It does not explain why it is not possible, even temporarily, to manage the association’s activities by other means. Nor does it clarify why the association cannot be reimbursed in the form of financial compensation even if it wins the case.
“If it turns out that the association’s activities implicate terrorist financing, the bank will face damages and sanctions, on top of the added risk to public safety in times of war.”
[ad_2]
Source link
