French Bank BNP Paribas Held Liable for Sudanese Atrocities
A federal jury in New York has delivered a significant verdict against France’s largest bank, BNP Paribas, ordering it to pay nearly $21 million in damages to three U.S. citizens who were displaced from Sudan. The plaintiffs, who lost their homes and property, were awarded between $6.7 million and $7.3 million each after jurors deliberated for approximately four hours.
The case against BNP Paribas centered on the bank’s role in providing the Sudanese government with access to the U.S. financial system during a period of atrocities in the country, which took place from at least 2002-08. According to the plaintiffs, the bank’s actions helped the Sudanese government “carry out one of the most notorious campaigns of persecution in modern history.” As many as 300,000 people were killed, and 2.7 million were driven from their homes in the Darfur region during this time.
Background and Context
The litigation pertains to government actions in various parts of Sudan, including the Darfur region, where the conflict led to widespread human rights abuses. The former President of Sudan, Omar Hassan Ahmad Bashir, is currently being held in a military-run detention facility in northern Sudan and has been charged by the International Criminal Court with crimes that include genocide.
BNP Paribas argued that it did not have liability, stating that human rights abuses in Sudan did not start with the bank and were not caused by its actions. The bank’s lawyers claimed that it never participated in Sudanese military transactions and did not finance the purchase of arms. However, the plaintiffs’ attorney, Adam Levitt, called the case a “bellwether trial” with findings that could be applied to other Sudanese refugees, including 23,000 U.S. citizens who are members of the class-action case.
Previous Sanctions and Settlements
In 2014, BNP Paribas agreed to pay nearly $9 billion to settle a case by entering a guilty plea in New York and acknowledging that it processed billions of dollars in transactions for clients in Sudan, as well as Cuba and Iran. The bank’s spokesperson stated that the recent verdict was specific to the three plaintiffs and “should not have broader application beyond this decision.”
Despite this, the plaintiffs’ attorney remains optimistic about the potential impact of the verdict, stating that the plaintiffs are “very gratified that steps on the road toward justice are being achieved, and they’re happy that the bank is being held responsible for its abhorrent conduct.” The case highlights the importance of holding financial institutions accountable for their role in facilitating human rights abuses and atrocities.
For more information on this case, visit Here
Image Source: www.latimes.com
