Luxembourg, 31/01/2006 (Agence Europe) - The lawyers of Yassin Abdullah Kadi of Saudi nationality call on the European Court of Justice to cancel the ruling of 21 September 2005 whereby the Court of First Instance had not agreed to Kadi's request to be removed from the terrorist list (Taliban). The Court of First Instance had deemed his action inadmissible, considering that, when it comes to combating terrorism, UN law overrides Community law and, for as long as Taliban funds were frozen in accordance to requirements set by the UN Security Council, such measures could not be brought under judicial review. The European Court of First Instance “erred in law” by interpreting the decisions of the Security Council as it did, the lawyers in question say.
In 2001, the UN Sanctions Committee had published an addendum to its list of entities and persons subject to the freeze on their assets pursuant to Security Council Resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1333 (2000), including “Al-Qadi, Yasin (A.K.A. Kadi, Shaykh Yassin Abdullah; A.K.A. Kahdi, Yasin), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia”. The defendant's name had been stated in a European regulation for which Yassin Abdullah requests annulment. His lawyers also consider that the reasoning of the European Court of First Instance presents “major inconsistency” in the way of dealing with Jus Cogens, generally defined as being an international public order composed of hierarchical norms to which it is impossible to derogate.
When delivering its ruling, the EU Court of First Instance had published a very lengthy press release noting all the subtle aspects of the matter. Among other things, one reads: “The Court of First Instance finds that, according to international law, the obligations of the Member States of the United Nations under the Charter of the United Nations 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” (see EUROPE 9032)”. This is challenged by the Saudi national, who has now changed his lawyers to introduce an appeal before the Court of Justice.