Israel Matzav

It's come to this: Terror victims win legal battle against Government of Israel in US court

The lawsuits are in connection to attacks in Israel, against Americans, between 2003 and 2008 and the ruling in the context of the Wultz case (one of a number of parallel cases, this one on behalf of their murdered son Daniel) and made in favor of a motion to intervene filed by NGO Shurat Hadin, who represents 22 additional victims' families. 

 

The bottom-line on the actual decision handed down late Friday, and as yet unreported elsewhere, by Washington DC federal court Judge Reggie Walton, was that he would not decide whether the case's key witness, former Israeli government agent Uzi Shaya, would need to testify in the case, but would leave that decision to New York federal court Judge Shira Scheindlin.  

 

The decision is potentially huge, as the Israeli government and the bank had fought with all of their might to keep this issue in Washington DC, knowing that Judge Scheindlin has essentially already ordered Shaya to testify.

 

Shaya's testimony could break the case open for the Wultz's, and for the 22 other American victims' families represented by Shurat Hadin, seriously concerning China, and therefore, seriously concerning the Israeli government which (despite alleged promises to help the victims) has turned against the case.

 

The plaintiffs allege that Israel turned against the case in mid-November 2013 to maintain Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's past state visit to China and out of concern of business interests with China, while the PMO has said that its reasons for blocking Shaya from testifying relate to preserving classified national security information and international cooperation in fighting terror financing.

 

Procedurally, Israel, the Wultz's and Shurat Hadin all filed extensive legal briefs, with Shurat Hadin's intervenor motion being partially granted by the court to have the issue decided by Scheindlin.

 

Israel had argued that certain rules about which court hears a case mandated that Walton hear the case and that the plaintiffs had not properly communicated with Israel about Shaya's testimony.

 

Walton rejected these procedural arguments saying that Israel's arguments were based on old rules which have been amended, eliminating Israel's procedural arguments.

Labels: Bank of China, Fatah, financing terror, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Palestinian terrorism, terror victim suits in US

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 6:44 PM