Arab Bank says US court decision over Hamas links ‘no surprise’

AMMAN — Arab Bank on Thursday said the Eastern District Court of New York’s decision to uphold rulings that the Amman-based bank was responsible for terror attacks in Israel that killed or wounded Americans was “predictable”.

On Wednesday, a federal judge in Brooklyn largely upheld a jury verdict that found the bank liable for 24 terrorist attacks, but agreed to drop two of those attacks from the verdict.

Arab Bank had sought a new trial and an expedited appeal, but the judge, Brian M. Cogan, denied both motions and said the bank could not appeal the jury’s decision until after the damages portion of the trial.

In September, the jury in the Federal District Court found Arab Bank liable for “knowingly supporting terrorism” by allowing money linked to the Islamist Hamas group, which the US considers a terrorist group, to be sent through its banks. 

Arab Bank released a statement saying that the decision came as no surprise.

“This opinion is an attempt by the district court to justify rulings that will be reviewed by the appellate courts, including decisions that have already been found by the US to be ‘erroneous’ and subject to ‘close scrutiny on appeal’,” said the statement.

Nothing in Wednesday’s opinion changes the fact that the district court’s proceedings were “fundamentally flawed and subject to reversal on appeal”, the bank added.

“The district court denied the bank a fair trial through its use of sanctions and other erroneous rulings that had the effect of precluding critical expert and fact witnesses from testifying, excluding exculpatory evidence and imposing substantial restraints on the few witnesses who were permitted to appear on the bank’s behalf. 

“The district court’s attempt to downplay the substantial impact of these rulings on the bank’s ability to defend itself is inconsistent with the trial record and its own acknowledgement that the sanctions it chose to impose on the bank were severe and made it ‘very difficult’, to defend the case”, the bank said.

Jordan’s largest financial institution said that the district court’s opinion also improperly rejects the bank’s argument that the absence of any proof that its financial services caused plaintiffs’ injuries requires judgment to be entered in its favour, claiming that this argument cannot see the forest for the trees.

The bank had been accused by victims of 24 attacks in and around Israel in the early 2000s of handling transactions for Hamas — which the plaintiffs said carried out the attacks — and routing money to charities that supported Hamas or families of suicide bombers.