{"id":106,"date":"2020-10-14T11:13:00","date_gmt":"2020-10-14T09:13:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cmselsc.test\/case\/cc_-student-slandered-during-uni-elections-3\/"},"modified":"2023-06-23T13:56:19","modified_gmt":"2023-06-23T11:56:19","slug":"complaint-vs-bundestag-anti-bds-motion","status":"publish","type":"case","link":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/case\/complaint-vs-bundestag-anti-bds-motion\/","title":{"rendered":"3 Activists Challenge the German Bundestag Anti-BDS Motion"},"content":{"rendered":"

In May 2020, lawyer Ahmed Abed, with the assistance of the ELSC, filed a complaint before the Administrative Court of Berlin against the 2019 Bundestag\u2019s anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) motion that condemns the movement as antisemitic.<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On 17 May 2019, the German Bundestag adopted the motion<\/a> \u201cResisting the BDS Movement with Determination \u2013 Combating Antisemitism<\/em>\u201d (Der BDS-Bewegung entschlossen entgegentreten \u2013 Antisemitismus bek\u00e4mpfen<\/em>). Based upon the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism which is quoted in the preamble, the motion expressly condemns the BDS campaign against Israel as antisemitic and further requests Federal States (L\u00e4nder<\/em>), municipalities and all public actors to deny any provision of premises and funding for the BDS movement or groups pursuing its objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several federal states and cities had already adopted similar motions following a first Bundestag motion from January 2018 that affirmed a commitment to \u201cresolutely counter the worldwide BDS movement\u201d. Although these motions are non-legally binding, BDS activists and supporters have been discriminated against throughout Germany by being disinvited from public events, denied access to public spaces and funding or to online platforms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Among others, Cameroonian intellectual Achille Mbembe was disinvited<\/a> from the annual music and arts festival, Ruhrtriennale, in March 2020 after pressure from several German politicians. In June 2019, US Rapper Talib Kweli was disinvited<\/a> from a German music festival after he refused to denounce the BDS movement. In September 2019, the German jury of the Nelly Sachs prize withdrawn<\/a> an award to Kamila Shamsie for her book after the jury were informed of her support to the BDS movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concerned by its significant chilling effect, three activists, represented by Berlin-based attorney Ahmed Abed and supported by the ELSC, decided to challenge the motion and filed a lawsuit requesting its nullification. Judith Bernstein, a German-Jewish spokesperson of the Munich “Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group”, Amir Ali, a German-Palestinian member of the organisation \u201cPalestine Speaks\u201d and Christoph Glanz, a German activist and spokesperson of \u201cBDS Oldenburg\u201d also founded the campaign, Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P)<\/a> to gain public support and raise awareness on the legitimacy of right to boycott the state of Israel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In May 2020, lawyer Abed, in cooperation with the ELSC, filed a complaint before the Administrative Court of Berlin arguing that the Bundestag motion, despite its non-legally binding nature, has a law-like effect leading to restrictions on the freedoms of expression and assembly. Furthermore, the applicants claim that the motion exposes human rights organisations and activists to public defamation as being antisemitic rather than granting them protection and support. As a consequence, the democratic and human-rights-led debate about Israel Palestine in the Federal Republic of Germany is significantly impacted and obstructed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

See the summary of the statement of claim<\/a> in the proceedings before the Administrative Court of Berlin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In support to the lawsuit, the ELSC instructed four renowned academics in international law, Eric David, Xavier Dupr\u00e9 De Boulois, Richard Falk and John Reynolds, to write a legal opinion on the Bundestag\u2019s motion incompatibility with European and International human rights standards. The opinion establishes the full legitimacy of the BDS movement as a human rights movement and underlines the negative impacts – with specific regard to the fundamental freedoms of expression, association and assembly – of the antisemitism stigmatisation on advocates for Palestinian rights in Germany. It concludes that the anti-BDS motions represents an unreasonable, disproportionate and unlawful restriction on the BDS movement\u2019s members\u2019 aforementioned rights, both as individuals and as a collective, and hence violate Germany\u2019s obligations under international human rights law and the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On October 7, 2021, a first hearing took place<\/a> at the Administrative Court of Berlin, which dismissed the complaint. The Court ruled that the fundamental rights of the complainants have not been violated and the Bundestag is allowed to use the controversial IHRA-WDA as a parameter to assess antisemitism. Nevertheless, it recognised both its jurisdiction on the case and BT3P\u2019s legal standing to challenge the resolution. Amir Ali, one of the plaintiffs, stated the following: <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

We will appeal. With this complaint we are opposing the systematic suppression of human rights work for Palestinians in Germany .<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The case is currently pending. See the updates below.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\n Timeline <\/summary>\n
\n

17 May 2019:<\/strong> The Bundestag adopts the motion \u201cResisting the BDS Movement with Determination \u2013 Combating Antisemitism<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n

18 May 2020:<\/strong> Lawyer Ahmed Abed, with the assistance of the ELSC, files the complaint before the Administrative Court of Berlin requesting the nullification of the anti-BDS motion.<\/p>\n

15 July 2020:<\/strong> Lawyer Abed submits before the Court the legal opinion on the legal implications of the anti-BDS motion commissioned by the ELSC.<\/p>\n

4 December 2020:<\/strong> The Administrative Court of Hesse ordered the city of Frankfurt by a temporary injunction to provide a venue to the Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P) campaigners to host an event.<\/p>\n

16 April 2021:<\/strong> The law firm hired by the Bundestag requests the Court to dismiss the BT3P’s lawsuit. The BT3P submit their answer and request a court hearing.<\/p>\n

7 October 2021:<\/strong> The Administrative Court of Berlin holds a first hearing for the lawsuit of BTP3 against the German Bundestag where the parties submit their oral arguments. The Court dismisses the case.<\/p>\n

January 2022:<\/strong> Lawyer Ahmed Abed files an appeal to the Administrative Court of Appeal of Berlin-Brandebourg.<\/p>\n

October 2022: <\/strong>The date for the appeal’s hearing is set to mid-2023.<\/p>\n

16 June 2023:<\/strong> Berlin Higher Administrative Court invites to hearing<\/a> for BT3P’s lawsuit against the German Bundestag. The Court declares<\/a> itself incompetent to judge this matter but deems the case viable to the Federal Constitutional Court because the case concerns fundamental legal issues.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n Relevant Documents <\/summary>\n
\n

\u2022 Letter by UN Experts letter criticising the German anti-BDS motion <\/a><\/p>\n

\u2022 Call by Jewish and Israeli scholars to the German parties not to equate BDS with antisemitism<\/a><\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n Media Coverage <\/summary>\n
\n

Electronic Intifada, Adri Nieuwhof, Human rights defenders sue German parliament over anti-BDS resolution<\/a><\/em>, 5 October 2020<\/p>\n

Junge Welt, Jakob Reimann, Leid darf nicht Begr\u00fcndung f\u00fcr weiteres Leid sein<\/a><\/em>, 1 December 2020<\/p>\n

Junge Welt, Jakob Reimann, Methode Mundtotmachen<\/a><\/em>, 1 December 2020<\/p>\n

MiGAZIN, Fabian Goldmann, BDS-Kritiker fordern von Pal\u00e4stinensern, dass sie still leiden und sterben<\/a><\/em>, 11 December 2020<\/p>\n

Mondoweiss, Activists launch legal challenge to Germany’s anti-BDS law<\/em><\/a>, 19 August 2021<\/p>\n

The Palestine Chronicle, ‘We Will Appeal’: German Court Dismisses Palestine Activists’ Efforts aimed at Reversing Anti-BDS Law<\/a>, 8 October 2021<\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n Related Updates <\/summary>\n
\n

BT3P PRESS RELEASE: No decision on the anti-BDS resolution of the German Bundestag. Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court declares itself without jurisdiction over BT3P’s lawsuit<\/a>, 17 June 2023<\/p>\n

More and more German courts confirm the right to BDS – Time for German cities and the Bundestag to scrap their shameful anti-Palestinian resolutions<\/a>, 9 February 2022
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

German Court dismisses the complaint against the Bundestag’s anti-BDS resolution. The plaintiffs announce: “We will appeal!”<\/a>, 14 October 2021<\/p>\n

Berlin Administrative Court holds hearing for lawsuit of BT3P against German Bundestag<\/a>, 4 October 2021<\/p>\n

New Lawsuit against Denial of Public Space for Palestine-Related Event<\/a>, 03 March 2021<\/p>\n

Regional German Constitutional Court Rules Anti-BDS Motion Infringes of Fundamental Rights<\/a>, 18 December 2020<\/p>\n

Another German Court ruled that the denial of public space to BDS supporters violates their rights to freedom of expression and assembly<\/a>, 7 December 2020<\/p>\n

We are suing the German Bundestag over its 2019 anti-BDS motion<\/a>, 18 September 2020<\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n

\n
\n Related ELSC Resources <\/summary>\n
\n

Legal Memo on the Right to Boycott<\/a>, 29 July 2019<\/p>\n

German Case Law: A coherent Set of Principles for Challenging anti-BDS resolutions<\/a>, 9 February 2022<\/p>\n <\/div>\n <\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In May 2020, lawyer Ahmed Abed, with the assistance of the ELSC, filed a complaint before the Administrative Court of Berlin against the Bundestag\u2019s anti-Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) motion, adopted by the German parliament in May 2019.<\/p>","protected":false},"featured_media":222,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_kad_blocks_custom_css":"","_kad_blocks_head_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_body_custom_js":"","_kad_blocks_footer_custom_js":"","_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":""},"country":[25],"incident_type":[28],"case_status":[9],"class_list":["post-106","case","type-case","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","country-de","incident_type-restrictive-policies","case_status-pending"],"acf":[],"taxonomy_info":{"country":[{"value":25,"label":"Germany"}],"incident_type":[{"value":28,"label":"Restrictive Policies"}],"case_status":[{"value":9,"label":"Pending"}]},"featured_image_src_large":["https:\/\/elsc.support\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/BT3P-Header-1024x649.jpg",1024,649,true],"author_info":[],"comment_info":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case\/106","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/case"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/222"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=106"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/country?post=106"},{"taxonomy":"incident_type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/incident_type?post=106"},{"taxonomy":"case_status","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elsc.support\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case_status?post=106"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}