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.
At the Higher Administrative Court (OVG) of Berlin-Brandenburg, on June 16, 2023, the second-instance hearing took place on the lawsuit filed by the Palestinian-Jewish-German initiative Bundestag 3 für Palästina (BT3P) against the anti-BDS resolution of the German Bundestag of May 17, 2019. The legal goal of BT3P is to achieve the illegality of the anti-BDS resolution. The OVG dismissed the appeal because it declared itself without jurisdiction. The court allowed an appeal to the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig because the case raises fundamental legal issues.
BT3P used the bans on their appearances and many other incidents to show that the Bundestag resolution is being used to defame and ban BDS and pro-Palestinian voices as anti-Semitic. Just a month ago, on May 4, 2023, the Administrative Court of Frankfurt am Main ruled that the defamation of the Jewish plaintiff Judith Bernstein as an anti-Semite because of her support for BDS was illegal.
The BT3P announced after the trial that they will continue the fight for their freedom of expression for human rights work for Palestine, if necessary up to the European Court of Human Rights.
About 50 sympathizers gathered in front of the Higher Administrative Court for a rally to demonstrate for the human rights of Palestinians and against the anti-BDS resolution of the Bundestag. The speakers emphasized that they stand for a just peace and an end to the Israeli occupation and apartheid. The Bundestag resolution has massively restricted their human rights work and freedom of expression in Germany since 2019.
BT3P plaintiffs Amir Ali, Judith Bernstein (represented by Sharon Blumenthal) and Christoph Glanz: "The defamation of pro-Palestinian human rights work in Germany as anti-Semitic continues. Although the court has not reached a verdict on the actual merits of the BDS resolution, it is appalling that our fundamental rights can still be massively restricted three years after the lawsuit was filed. In passing the resolution, the Bundestag never intended to combat anti-Semitism, but only to foment anti-Palestinian racism and make pro-Palestinian voices disappear from public life in Germany. Even though we lost today, we will continue to fight, if necessary all the way to the European Court of Human Rights. Our friends in France lost an important BDS-related case in all French instances - and then won against the Republic of France in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. This makes us very optimistic that we will ultimately reach justice. We will not be silent and will continuously speak about Israel's crimes against humanity against the Palestinian people for 75 years. Palestine will be liberated and Israel's apartheid, occupation and colonization will fall."
Attorney Ahmed Abed: "The ruling of the Higher Administrative Court shows that there is a gap in the legal system. The Palestinian-Jewish-German group BT3P is being subjected to space bans, funding bans, assembly bans, and additionally defamation as Nazi-like anti-Semitism in Germany because of the Bundestag decision. The Bundestag has violated the fundamental right of freedom of expression by calling for unlawful action against Palestinian human rights work.”
Press requests: press@bt3p.org
ANNOUNCEMENT: Berlin Higher Administrative Court invites to hearing for BT3P's lawsuit against the German Bundestag on June 16, 2023
In May 2020, the Palestinian-Jewish-German initiative Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P) filed a lawsuit against the German Bundestag's anti-BDS resolution of May 17, 2019 before the Berlin Administrative Court (Case No. VG 2 K 79/20). The legal goal of BT3P is to achieve the nullity of the anti-BDS resolution.
The BT3P support the BDS campaign and claim that the German Bundestag resolution suppresses advocacy for Palestinian human rights by excluding them from public institutions and defaming them as "antisemitic." The initiative considers the resolution a violation of its basic democratic rights (Article 1(1) of the Basic Law, Article 5(1) of the Basic Law, Article 8(1) of the Basic Law, and Article 9(1) of the Basic Law). In addition, the decision undermines international law and is anti-Palestinian.
After the Berlin Administrative Court dismissed the case, BT3P filed an appeal before the Berlin-Brandenburg Higher Administrative Court. The court has now summoned to a hearing on June 16, 2023 at 11 am. The hearing will take place in the office building of the Berlin Higher Administrative Court at Hardenbergstrasse 31 in Berlin.
BT3P invite all interested parties to a rally in front of the building of the Berlin Higher Administrative Court at Hardenbergstrasse 31 in Berlin at 10 am.
A press conference will take place in or outside the court house after the court hearing.
If you have any questions, the BT3P team can be reached by e-mail (team@bt3p.org).
In order to make the lawsuit a legal and political success, the BT3P require your financial support. You can find their appeal for donations HERE.
PRESS RELEASE: BT3P file lawsuit to force parliamentary seminar in Bundestag on BDS
On May 9, 2023, Berlin-based attorney Ahmed Abed filed a lawsuit against the German Bundestag on behalf of BT3P at the Administrative Court of Berlin (Case No. A 7512/23). The aim is to prevent the holding of a parliamentary seminar entitled "The current position of the parliamentary groups in the Bundestag and the federal government on the BDS movement. What impact does the BDS resolution of 17.5.2019 have on human rights work and freedom of expression in Germany?".
More than 50 interested people had registered in advance for this seminar, including former members of the German Bundestag (such as Annette Groth and Prof. Norman Paech), the rapper Hanybal, several young activists* or even the German-Israeli historian Prof. Moshe Zuckermann. In addition, members and representatives of various Palestinian groups, BDS groups, Jewish peace groups, churches, trade unions and German civil society were among the co-applicants for this seminar.
The Bundestag had twice rejected the holding of the parliamentary seminar. According to the Bundestag, a situation was threatening in which the parliamentarians would be confronted "with their own, already firmly established position" (of the participants) on Israel/Palestine (letter from the Bundestag dated 11.11.2022, reference: IK 1/21-2023-04).
Attorney Abed comments on this view in his statement of claim as follows:
"The democratic exchange consists precisely in exchanging different opinions. (...) The idea of the defendant that citizens should only be recipients and multipliers of the opinions of parliamentarians is contrary to the parliamentary principles of a democratic state and alienates."
Amir Ali, BT3P Team:
"You have to think about it: In rejecting the seminar, the Bundestag did not dare to choose its own resolution as justification. Instead, he chooses anti-democratic excuses. We will not let up and demand that the German Bundestag finally deal with Palestinian human rights, international jurisprudence on Israel and Palestine, and the Palestinian BDS movement in a proper manner and discuss them with critical civil society."
Judith Bernstein, BT3P Team:
"Just last week I was able to celebrate a legal success against the former mayor of Frankfurt and ex-chairman of the German-Israeli Society DIG. He had portrayed me - a descendant of survivors of the Shoah - as a sympathizer of anti-Semites. And this only because I am convinced that Palestinians deserve freedom and justice. A very similar logic is regularly followed by top German politicians- I want to take the parliamentarians to task on these issues and hope for a delayed parliamentary seminar!"
Press contact: team@bt3p.org
ANNOUNCEMENT: Berlin Administrative Court holds hearing for lawsuit of BT3P against German Bundestag on October 7, 2021
In May 2020, the Palestinian-Jewish-German initiative Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P) filed a lawsuit against the German Bundestag's anti-BDS resolution of May 17, 2019 before the Berlin Administrative Court (Case No. VG 2 K 79/20). The legal goal of BT3P is to achieve the nullity of the anti-BDS resolution.
BT3P support the BDS campaign and claim that the German Bundestag resolution suppresses advocacy for Palestinian human rights by excluding them from public institutions and defaming them as "anti-Semitic." The initiative considers the resolution a violation of its basic democratic rights (Article 1(1) of the Basic Law, Article 5(1) of the Basic Law, Article 8(1) of the Basic Law, and Article 9(1) of the Basic Law). In addition, the decision undermines international law and demonstrates anti-Palestinian racism.
The Berlin Administrative Court now intends to rule after exchanging hundreds of pages and has summoned BT3P and the German Bundestag to an oral hearing on October 7, 2021 at 12pm. The hearing will take place in the office building of the Berlin Administrative Court at Kirchstraße 7 in Berlin.
The BT3P invite all interested parties to a rally in front of the building of the Berlin Administrative Court on October 7, 2021 at 11am. A press conference will take place directly after the hearing. Time and place will be communicated in due course.
German parliament requests Berlin Court to dismiss BT3P’s legal action against anti-BDS resolution
In May 2020, the Palestinian-Jewish-German initiative Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P) sued the German parliament (Bundestag) for its anti-BDS resolution passed on May 17, 2019. The responsible court in this matter is the Berlin Administrative Court (Berliner Verwaltungsgericht, 2. Kammer, case number: VG 2 K 79/20). The goal of the BT3P is to have the resolution nullified by the court.
The BT3P support the Palestinian-led BDS campaign and argue that the resolution of the Bundestag exclude them from public venues and diffames them as "antisemitic". The initiative sees their democratic basic rights for human rights work infringed by the resolution. Besides that, the resolution undermines international law and is anti-Palestinian in nature.
The Bundestag hired the international law firm Redeker Sellner Dahs to represent them in court. On April 16, 2021, the law firm requested the Berlin Administrative Court in Berlin to dismiss the BT3P’s lawsuit. The BT3P’s lawyer, Ahmed Abed, will submit the response to the court in the coming weeks. After that, the court will make a decision on the initiation of a court hearing.
Statement of the BT3P plaintiffs (Judith Bernstein, Amir Ali, Christoph Glanz)
"Our legal claim submitted to the court contained 19 cases of discrimination against BDS activists and supporters of the Palestinian cause triggered by the Bundestag resolution. The authority of the Bundestag turns the "non-binding resolution" de facto into a law - a law which diffames human rights work for Palestinians as antisemitic and thereby ousts us from any public venue or space. This situation is continuing, even after we have appealed to the court. The mayor of Frankfurt and head of the German Israeli Society (DIG), Uwe Becker, for example, tried to have our December 2020 event banned while explicitly referring to the Bundestag resolution as a legal basis.
We cannot accept that democratic basic rights of us and other supporters of the Palestinian cause are being infringed upon again and again and that we are prohibited from speaking out in public against Israeli apartheid policies and in favour of Palestinian human rights. Calling things by their name is essential for a positive change in Palestine/ Israel -just like the Israeli human rights organisation B’tselem and the international NGO Human Rights Watch have done when referring to Israel as an apartheid regime. Distributing relevant information and being active against these conditions must be self-explanatory in a democratic society."
Ahemd Abed, lawyer of the BT3P:
"One year after the BT3P handed in their comprehensive lawsuit, the Bundestag answers with a 63 pages replica issued by the international law firm Redeker Sellner Dahs. The Bundestag claims that the resolution had no legal effect whatsoever and that the BT3P’s rights have not been infringed upon. De facto though, my clients and many other individuals and groups have had their public events cancelled and have partially even been physically attacked and slandered as antisemitic. This way, my clients’ human rights activism is made impossible. I am confident that the Berlin Administrative Court will rule in favour of my clients as the infringement on the freedom of speech of the BT3P is incompatible with the German constitution and the European Charter of Human Rights."
For press inquiries and further information please contact:
press@bt3p.org - https://twitter.com/BT3Pteam - https://www.bt3p.org/
BDS activism in Corona times: BT3P event in Munich on 20th of March 2021
As expected, our event contributing to the "Israeli Apartheid Week" and the International Week of Action against Racism was heavily fought in advance. The city of Munich tried to ban the event for political reasons, explicitly referring to its own city council resolution against BDS.
In contrast to previous verdicts in other cities, the BT3P were not able to enforce the right to public space in the second judicial instance. However, the Bavarian Administrative Court did not endorse the anti-BDS resolution of the Munich City Council, but solely ruled on the basis of the corona restrictions.
The event "Apartheid by the State of Israel - the ignorance of German politics" then took place as an online meeting with 100 participants.
The meeting started with a commemoration of the recently deceased publicist and historian Dr. Reiner Bernstein. Christoph Glanz then elaborated the concept of Apartheid based on the historical situation of South Africa on the occasion of the anniversary of the terrible Sharpeville Massacre from 1960. Ahmed Abed presented the legal situation of the BT3P lawsuit against the German Bundestag. The Bundestag has to submit its defense to the court until end of March 2021.
The special guest, Fayrouz Sharqawi, from the organization "Grassroots Al Quds" reported live from Jerusalem and presented eloquently and unequivocally the severe effects of Apartheid on the lives of the Palestinian people. Lively discussions with the participants followed.
Immediately after the meeting, the BT3P held a demonstration in front of the Gasteig, the institution of the City of Munich, which prohibited them to speak. 20 protesters gathered to express their demand for justice with banners and short speeches. Both, the event and the demonstration, were supported by local Munich groups, including Women in Black, Salam Shalom and the Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group.
One of the demonstrators was former member of the Bundestag and human rights policy spokesperson for the DIE LINKE parliamentary group, Annette Groth (Stuttgart):
"Apartheid is a crime against humanity that must be punished. In this respect, Apartheid committed by Israel must also be branded as a crime and punished…The Bundestag resolution portrays BDS as anti-Semitic. It is wrong and hateful to denigrate a human rights movement in such a way. Therefore, I wholeheartedly welcome BT3P's courageous complaint. This pseudo-legislation is contrary to democratic principles and must therefore be annulled by the courts."
The BT3P sum up:
"The city of Munich fought an anti-racist group during the anti-racism weeks- this says it all. We will return to Munich under more favorable circumstances. On the one hand, to address the strong interest in our content and, on the other hand, to uncover and abolish Munich’s anti-BDS resolution.
Overall, we take away a lot of positive aspects from this event: the large number of participants and the support of local civil society groups confirm the citizens’ desire for information and dialogue around Israel’s crimes against humanity and the BDS movement.
A highlight was certainly Fayrouz Sharqawi's contribution. She strongly explained the ugly realities for Palestinians in Jerusalem and thereby expressed the continuous need to amplify the Palestinian voice and to stand up against the conditions that oppress the Palestinians.
In a few days, we will receive the legal defense from the lawyers of the German Bundestag. We will then inform the public about it in a timely manner and announce further events in other German cities in order to talk about the lawsuit.”
BT3P Initiative wins lawsuit against city of Frankfurt am Main and is awarded municipal space for BDS event
The Palestinian-Jewish-German initiative Bundestag 3 für Palästina (BT3P) of Amir Ali, Judith Bernstein and Christoph Glanz has won the right to rent municipal space in Frankfurt am Main in front ot the Hessian Administrative Court. With the help of Berlin lawyer Ahmed Abed, it was possible to enforce the use of space against the proclaimed BDS ban of the city of Frankfurt am Main by means of an emergency application. The decision of the 8th Senate of the Hessian Administrative Court (Case No. 8 B 3012/20) states:
"The respondent is provisionally ordered by way of interim injunction to provide the applicant (...) with the "Great Hall" in the SAALBAU Südbahnhof on December 5, 2020 under the usual contractual conditions in the period from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m. for the purpose of holding the event "Freedom of expression for human rights work instead of censorship - The lawsuit of Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P) against the anti-BDS resolution of the German Bundestag"."
BT3P commented on this success against the City of Frankfurt am Main as follows:
Amir Ali: "Three years after the decision of the city of Frankfurt am Main against the BDS movement, it has now been clarified by the court that it violates the Basic Law (Grundgesetz). The city cannot forbid us to speak about human rights violations against the Palestinian people by the Israeli occupation and the demand for equal rights for all people in Israel and Palestine. All cities, towns and municipalities and the German Bundestag itself must quickly rescind their discriminatory and unlawful resolutions against human rights work for the Palestinians."
Judith Bernstein: "For the second time, Mayor Uwe Becker has tried to prevent discussion of Palestinian human rights and has failed again. Last year Becker tried in vain to prevent a lecture with me as Jewish spokesperson of the Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group in Frankfurt. In doing so, Becker compared me to the anti-Semitic murderer of Halle, which is why I filed a lawsuit against the city of Frankfurt am Main."
Christoph Glanz: "The city of Frankfurt am Main allows demonstrations of the partly openly anti-Semitic “Querdenker” (meanwhile banned), but wants to prevent discussions of Palestinian, Jewish and German human rights activists on Palestine and Israel again and again. This way the city of Frankfurt am Main is supporting the ultra-right Israeli government and its occupation and apartheid policy towards the Palestinians. These human rights crimes committed daily by the state of Israel do not pause during the Covid-19 pandemic and that is why we will continue to work against it and will not stop until freedom, equality and justice are achieved for all Palestinians."
Ahmed Abed, attorney for BT3P: "The Hessian Administrative Court, in lifting the ban on rooms, has declared the Frankfurt decision against BDS human rights activists legally irrelevant. The Bavarian Administrative Court, the Administrative Court of Cologne and the Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony could not find any anti-Semitism in the BDS movement in previous rulings and have also lifted all room bans. The German Bundestag should now act and rescind the decision against the BDS movement and instead clearly condemn and sanction Israel's occupation, which is illegal under international law. The European Court of Justice has called on member states to enforce mandatory labeling of Israeli settler goods to end the illegal Israeli occupation."
Due to the short notice ruling of the Hessian Administrative Court, the BT3P event will take place one week later, on 12.12.2020 at 14:00-16:00, at the SAALBAU premises at Südbahnhof.
The BT3P have filed a lawsuit against the decision of the Bundestag to ban the BDS movement. With the further decision of the Hessian Administrative Court, there is further proof that this decision is illegal and violates the German constitution.
For press and interview inquiries, please contact press@bt3p.org. We will be happy to provide all relevant documents.
Summary of the Statement of Claim in the Proceedings against the Anti-BDS Decision before the Administrative Court of Berlin (Gz. VG 2 K 79/20)
By attorney Ahmed Abed
The lawsuit is directed at the nullity and omission of the anti-BDS resolution of the German Bundestag of 17.05.2019 (Dr. 19/10191).
On behalf of Bundestag 3 for Palestine #BT3P, the lawsuit against the Bundestag resolution was filed before the Administrative Court of Berlin on 18.05.2020. The BT3P are the plaintiffs Ms. Judith Bernstein, Mr. Amir Ali and Mr. Christoph Glanz, with three different backgrounds - Jewish, Palestinian and German - a common history and a goal:
TOGETHER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL LAW! FOR EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE IN ISRAEL AND PALESTINE AND THE END OF THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION!
With this decision, the plaintiffs who advocate for human rights with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS movement) are exposed to a particularly high level of public defamation with the aim of excluding them from public discussions, which causes enormous damage to human rights work in Germany. Without a legal basis, freedom of expression, assembly and association is restricted within the Bundestag and other public actors, such as states, municipalities and cities, are also called upon to disregard simple legal and constitutional norms, such as the municipal right to use premises.
From the terrible situation for the 4.98 million Palestinians under Israeli military occupation, annexation and Israeli apartheid (see, among others, UN Special Rapporteur Michael Lynk report, June 15, 2020, p. 867-913; http://ejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/24/3/867.full.pdf+html and Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People, UN Economic and Social Commission for West Asia [UN-ESCWA] report 2017) stems their motivation to stand up for human rights and international rights. They demand equal civil and social rights for all people in Israel and Palestine and an end to the Israeli occupation. In light of their louder motives and personal stories against the high authority of the Bundestag in public, the stigmatizing effect of the resolution is particularly high.
The lawsuit is supported by the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC) with the legal opinion "Legal Implications of the Anti-BDS Resolution adopted by the German Bundestag on May 17, 2019” by international law scholars Prof. em. Eric David, Prof. Xavier Dupré De Boulois, Prof. em. Richard Falk (former UN Special Rapporteur on Israel and Palestine) and Prof. John Reynold. They demonstrate that the decision is incompatible with European and international human rights standards.
Calls to break the law are unlawful
The calls for the states, municipalities and all other public actors to act in violation of the law, such as banning the use of municipal premises, excluding municipal funding and facilities, is unlawful. Instead of a law, the Bundestag has passed a resolution that has the effect of a law in order to restrict the freedom of expression of the plaintiffs who support the BDS campaign. Under the Basic Law, however, the Bundestag is required to enact a law if it wishes to restrict freedom of expression or freedom of assembly (Article 5(2) of the Basic Law, Article 8(2) of the Basic Law). However, such a law would be unconstitutional, incompatible with Art. 10 para. 1 and Art. 11 para. 1 ECHR (judgment of the ECtHR of 11.06.2020, R.no. 15271, Press release http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=003-6718555-8953654), the European Regulation [EU] No. 1169/2011 (ECJ, C-363/18) and the state obligation of non-support and non-recognition of the Israeli occupation, which is illegal under international law.
„In its resolutions, the Parliament may not under any circumstances demand anything unconstitutional or even unlawful (illegal) under simple law. Otherwise, the parliament is required to amend laws in a generally binding manner or to initiate amendments. Under no circumstances can it, even if it is a matter of its own legal rules, set them aside by resolution for the individual case.“ (Luch, Anika D., in: Morlok/Schliesky/Wiefelspütz, Parlamentsrecht, p. 417)
State obligation to support human rights work
The effects of the stigmatizing evaluation and calls in violation of the law led to the violation of freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of association for the plaintiffs' human rights work in Frankfurt am Main, Munich, Oldenburg, Bonn, Göttingen, Berlin, Mannheim, Bielefeld, Dortmund, Aachen and at the music festival Open-Source and at the Ruhrtriennale. The plaintiffs' fundamental rights could only be defended with several successful court cases. The state, however, has the duty to support human rights work and not to hinder it, Art. 10 and 11 ECHR, Art. 19 para. 1, 21 and 22 IpbR.
Violation of BT3P's General Right of Personality, Freedom of Expression, Assembly and Association - Incidents in Cities and Municipalities
Based on numerous incidents in recent years, it is clear that the stigmatization, public exclusion, up to insults against the plaintiffs and other activists to the violation of the General Personality Rights (APR) from Art. 2 para. 1 sentence 1 in conjunction with. Article 1 (1) GG, freedom of expression, Article 5 (1) p. 1 GG, freedom of assembly, Article 8 (1) GG, and freedom of association, Article 9 (1) GG, as well as Articles 10 and 11 ECHR, 19 (1), 21 and 22 IpbR. The following incidents are exemplary:
(1) With the justification that the Bundestag resolution must be followed, the city of Frankfurt am Main tried to prevent an event with Ms. Judith Bernstein on the topic of "Freedom of Expression instead of Censorship" of the IPPNW and attac in October 2019, branded her as a supporter of National Socialist anti-Semitism and compared her with the murderer of Halle. After the room was cancelled at short notice, the event took place by an emergency court decision. Rooms for other events in Munich were also cancelled.
(2) Mr. Christoph Glanz was insulted for his BDS support in long tirades at an event by a board member of the German-Israeli Society (DIG) as an "anti-Semite pig" and "shitty anti-Semite" and tried to drag him out of the room by force. Instead of throwing Mr. Glanz out, the organizers threw the DIG board member out. The Oldenburg Regional Court then sentenced him, but used the Bundestag resolution as the basis for evaluating the attack against Mr. Glanz. In the same year, Mr. Glanz had to enforce his municipal right to use space, which he was denied because of his BDS support, in court (Nds. OVG, Az. 10 ME 48/19). He was already banned from using a municipal space in 2016.
(3) Amir Ali is a member of the group "Palestine Speaks - Coalition for Palestinian Rights and Against Racism". The Berlin Senate tried to prevent an event with "Palestine Speaks" in January 2020 because of the resolution, which failed.
Other incidents and court cases in which the Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group, Jewish Voice for Just Peace, German-Palestinian Women's Association, Palestinian Community Bonn, Peace Plenum Mannheim, German-Palestinian Society, "Palestinian Associations" in Bonn, Rolf Verleger, Achille Mbembe, Klaus Ried, IPPNW, Kamila Shamsie, Walid Raad, Nirit Sommerfeld, Talib Kweli, Christoph Glanz, Judith Bernstein and Dr. Reiner Bernstein have been attacked and barred from public spaces because of the resolution or similar resolutions show how much freedom of expression for human rights work has been restricted in Germany.
No legal and factual basis for the warnings and assessments
There is no legal basis for the state warnings against the BDS campaign and the supreme court requirements for state information actions are not observed (see Glykolwein decision [BVerfGE 105, 253] and Osho decision [BVerfGE 105, 278]). A hearing did not take place and the Bundestag judges exclusively one-sided. The comparison with National Socialist extermination anti-Semitism against the BDS campaign and against the plaintiffs is without factual and legal basis, particularly defamatory and leads to an enormous pillorying effect (see OLG Nuremberg, Az. 3 U 1523/18, LG Munich I, Az. 25 O 1612/17). The BDS campaign and the plaintiffs despise anti-Semitism, quite particularly from their personal history.
IHRA's inapplicable and amended definition of anti-Semitism
The anti-Semitism definition used is not scientifically robust and therefore inapplicable (see in detail GUTACHTEN ZUR "WORKING DEFINITION ANTISEMITISM" DER INTERNATIONAL HOLOCAUST REMEMBRANCE ALLIANCE, by Dr. Dr. Peter Ulrich, September 2019). The resolution lists a modified IHRA definition that no longer corresponds to the IHRA definition used by European governments. The third sentence "manifestations of anti-Semitism can also be directed against the state of Israel, which is thereby understood as a Jewish collective." is not from the IHRA definition, but from the application instructions for the definition. Essentially, there are four arguments against the applicability of the IHRA definition.
The application instructions to the definition, that the overall context must be considered, are decidedly vague;
The Agency for Fundamental Rights has rejected the definition;
The definition is not intended to be legally binding, but is applied with legal consequences;
The application instructions to the definition include a kind of exculpatory sentence "However, criticism of Israel comparable to that of other countries cannot be considered anti-Semitic," thereby comparing virtually all of human history to Israel's practices. The IHRA definition listed in the resolution does not stand up to critical scrutiny.
No legal basis for restricting the BDS campaign in the Bundestag.
The self-binding regulations for the Bundestag (III. of the resolution) to establish the opinion of the plaintiffs as an exclusion criterion in rooms, facilities and in the financing of the Bundestag lacks a legal basis. However, the Bundestag is bound by law, statute and the constitution, Article 1 (3) of the Basic Law, Article 20 (1) of the Basic Law. Restrictions on fundamental rights without a law are incompatible with the Basic Law and provisions of simple law.
Further successful proceedings
In favor of the plaintiffs and other activists of the BDS campaign decided the Administrative Court of Oldenburg (Room withdrawal , Az. 3 A 3012/16), Higher Administrative Court Lower Saxony (Room withdrawal, Az. 10 ME 48/19), Munich Regional Court I (Room withdrawal, ref. 12 O 13183/19), Cologne Administrative Court (Room withdrawal, ref. 14 L 1765/19), Mannheim Regional Court (Room withdrawal, ref. 17 C 5568/19), Oldenburg Regional Court (Offense/Defamation, ref. 5 O 1380/19), Frankfurt a.M. Regional Court. (Room withdrawal , ref. 2-32 O 126/19), Stuttgart Regional Court (False claim/Offense, ref. 11 O 120/19) the ECtHR (Sanctioning, Baldassi et al. v. France, ref. 15271/16), and the ECJ (Mandatory labeling, ref. C-363/18). Further proceedings are pending before the VG Frankfurt a.M. (False claim/Offense, ref. 7 K 851/20.F) and the Bavarian Higher Administrative Court (Room withdrawal, ref. M 7 K 18.3672). Already in the proceedings before the Higher Administrative Court Lower Saxony (Az. 10 ME 48/19) the court stated that the BDS campaign could not be described as anti-Semitic and in the proceedings before the Administrative Cologne (Az. 14 L 1765/19) it was stated that fundamental rights may not be restricted by the resolution.
Press release: Lawsuit filed against German Bundestag based on its anti-BDS resolution
Activists with Jewish, Palestinian and German roots sue the German Bundestag for violating the German Basic Law with the anti-BDS resolution of May 2019.
The Bundestag 3 for Palestine (in short: BT3P), are defending themselves with the lawsuit against the violation of their freedom of expression and assembly (German Basic Law - Art. 5 and 8 GG) as well as the violation of their general personal right and freedom of association from (German Basic Law - Art. 2, Art. 1 GG, Art. 9 GG). The BT3P are the Israeli-born Jew Judith Bernstein, the German-Palestinian Amir Ali and the long-time BDS activist Christoph Glanz.
In May 2020, Berlin-based human rights lawyer Ahmed Abed filed the lawsuit on behalf of his clients against the anti-BDS resolution of the Bundestag of 17.05.2019 (Drs. 10191/19) at the Administrative Court of Berlin (Az. VG 2 K 79/20). The legal goal is to achieve the nullity of the anti-BDS resolution.
The anti-BDS resolution of the German Bundestag prohibits the support, opinion and assembly of BDS supporters and human rights activists and calls on all public actors, such as states, cities and municipalities, to withdraw public spaces and finances. As justification for this decision, the German Bundestag portrays the BDS movement as anti-Semitic, although this has already been denied by German and European courts.
In May 2019 - even before the Bundestag's decision - 240 Jewish and Israeli scholars also warned the German Bundestag not to "label supporters of Palestinian human rights as anti-Semitic." On June 3, 2019, the same group stated, "We conclude that the rise of anti-Semitism is clearly not the concern that inspired the motion passed by the Bundestag. On the contrary, this motion is driven by the political interests (...) of Israel's most right-wing government (...)."
In Frankfurt am Main, Oldenburg, Munich and Berlin, the authorities there have repeatedly tried to deprive the plaintiffs of public spaces for their events with reference to the Bundestag resolution. Only through legal enforcement in front of various courts (including the Oldenburg Administrative Court, Lower Saxony Higher Administrative Court, Munich Regional Court, Frankfurt am Main Regional Court, Cologne Administrative Court) were the plaintiffs finally able to assert their right to freedom of expression and assembly. However, they are not the only ones affected by this kind of restriction of their fundamental rights. This also affects a large number of human rights activists, artists and scientists, including for example the renowned philosopher Achille Mbembe.
Due to the untenability of the accusations against the BDS movement, European courts have also regularly ruled in favor of the plaintiff activists in the past. In particular, the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights stands out: in a judgment from spring 2020, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs (BDS activists) and against the Republic of France (Baldassi et al. v. France, Az. 15271/16).
The lawsuit is supported by the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC) and the internationally renowned international law scholars Prof. Eric David, Prof. Xavier Dupré De Boulois, Prof. Richard Falk (former UN Special Rapporteur) and Prof. John Reynolds. They contributed an expert opinion to the Statement of Claim entitled: "Legal Implications of the Anti-BDS Resolution Adopted by the German Bundestag on May 17, 2019".
Bundestag 3 for Palestine (BT3P): Our Principles
“We know all too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinian people.”
Who we are
We, the Bundestag 3 for Palestine (#BT3P), have sued the Bundestag of the Federal Republic of Germany. In this policy paper, we would like to explain how this came about, why this step was necessary and what you can do to support our initiative.
Judith Bernstein is a German Jew, born in Jerusalem and winner of the 2017 "Aufrechter Gang" award of the Humanistische Union Bayern. Together with her husband Dr Reiner Bernstein, she received the award for laying Stolpersteine (literally: “stumbling blocks” commemorating Jewish victims of the Shoah right at the very spot where they lived before their deportation) in Munich and for her commitment to peace between Israelis and Palestinians*. She is the spokesperson of the Munich-based "Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue Group".
Amir Ali is of German-Palestinian origin. His family was completely displaced from the region of Haifa in 1948 and they now live as refugees in Jordan. Amir is involved in the "Palästina Spricht-Palestine Speaks" initiative of young Palestinians and German-Palestinians.
Christoph Glanz has been an active anti-fascist and anti-racist since his youth. He lived and worked in Israel/Palestine for two years and has been a volunteer for the Palestinian BDS campaign for several years (BDS-Initiative Oldenburg).
The Berlin-based lawyer Ahmed Abed filed the lawsuit. Attorney Abed has repeatedly and successfully challenged restrictions on freedom of opinion and freedom of assembly targeting the BDS campaign (verdicts: Niedersächsisches OVG, 10 ME 48/19, VG Köln, 14 L 1765/19) in the courts and has been campaigning nationally and internationally for human rights for years.
What unites us three plaintiffs as politically thinking and acting persons is our unconditional commitment to human rights. We oppose all forms of racism, discrimination and oppression without any exception. Our commitment to the Palestinian cause and BDS arises from this very obligation and these values.
We have sued the Bundestag - why?
On May 17, 2019, the Bundestag passed a non-binding resolution that branded the BDS campaign as anti-Semitic, denied any cooperation with BDS activists and supporters, and called on states, municipalities and cities to obstruct events dealing with BDS by denying them public space. Due to the authority of the German Bundestag, states, municipalities and local authorities as well as private companies de facto comply with this decision. They apply it against BDS activists and Palestine supporters despite its obvious flaws and contradictions and the lack of a legal basis. This grossly violates the basic right to freedom of expression for human rights work in Germany.
To be able to assess this situation, one must first know what BDS actually is. The BDS campaign was launched in 2005 by Palestinian civil society. It is the response to decades of ethnic "cleansing", military occupation, continuous oppression and apartheid practices by the Israeli state and is oriented in its principles and means to the historic boycott movement against the apartheid regime in South Africa.
The BDS campaign includes three demands of the Palestinians rooted in international law and the resolutions of the United Nations, namely:
The right of the refugees to return to their homeland
The complete dismantling of the illegal Israeli wall and barrier installations in the West Bank and the end of the occupation, and
The full legal equality of all Palestinian citizens of Israel.
To achieve these demands, three non-violent means are used, which are based on the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa, namely
Boycott
Divestment
Sanctions.
We as BT3P join the above mentioned demands of the Palestinian civil society.
The resolution of the German Bundestag in question defames the Palestinians and their demands covered by international law (see above) as well as their non-violent method of enforcing these demands (BDS) by labelling them as anti-Semitic. Nothing could be further away from the truth. Human rights are indivisible and therefore every human being is entitled to them. The demand for human rights for the Palestinians of course does not mean that other people's rights shall be taken away from them. To claim this in the face of decades of violent oppression, expulsion, apartheid and occupation by the Israeli state is a vile defamation of the Palestinians themselves and the people who support them in their legitimate struggle. In the court case we will show that this has very concrete anti-democratic and racist effects here in Germany, too.
Our evaluation of the Bundestag resolution
The majority of the Bundestag has voted in favour of the resolution (https://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/101/1910191.pdf) and thus successfully passed it. Numerous members of the Bundestag did not appear on that particular day. The parliamentary group DIE LINKE voted against the resolution, but in favour of its own motion, which also opposed BDS. A minority of the Bundestag abstained completely and the ultra right-wing AfD even tried to push through a motion to legally ban BDS in Germany for good. (https://dip21.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/19/097/1909757.pdf).
Not even an appeal by 240 Jewish and Israeli academics could dissuade the members of the Bundestag from this vote. They wrote:
“We are appalled that demands for equal rights and compliance with international law are considered anti-Semitic. (...) this motion is driven by political interests and policies of the most right-wing government of Israel (...).”
We must state:
In the entire German Bundestag not a single politician raised her/ his voice clearly and unconditionally stood in favour of the oppressed and of international law. This decision and the widespread systematic obstruction of a human rights campaign will one day be considered by the general public as the equivalent of supporting the South African apartheid state and the defamation and criminalization of the liberation movement there.
“Governments which criminalize or unreasonably restrict BDS activities should end these measures and instead ensure that BDS advocates can freely express their views and conduct their campaigns without harassment or threat of prosecution.”
The legal perspective
Instead of promoting human rights in Palestine and Israel, BDS activists and Palestine supporters are attacked by this resolution. A legal basis for restricting freedom of opinion, assembly and association does not exist. Neither the warning issued by the state against the BDS campaign nor the declaration of and demand for bans on assembly and opinion on BDS are based on a legal basis. The resolution demands that the German federal states, municipalities and all other public actors ban venues and facilities for BDS affiliated groups, which constitutes nothing short of a demand to break the law. The fundamental democratic rights and laws that guarantee the provision of rooms and facilities to all citizens are being ignored without any consideration. Serious and defamatory accusations are raised against BDS supporters- according to the public slander they do not only adhere to some kind of anti-Semitism, but to the very eliminatory racist manifestation of jew hatred, which resulted in millions of European jewish victims during the Shoah at the hands of Nazi Germany.
Furthermore, the decision is incompatible with European and international human rights, as they are enshrined in Art. 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the UN Civil Pact.
As in the recent verdicts of the European Court of Human Rights of June 11, 2020 (Baldassi et al vs. France, Case 15271/16 and others), of the European Court of Justice (C-363/18) and of the Administrative Court of Cologne on September 12, 2019 (14 L 1675/19), we are convinced that the courts will ultimately rule in favour of freedom of expression for human rights work in the context of BDS.
Effects of the Bundestag resolution
The encroachment on our democratic rights of freedom is also present in the case of the German Bundestag. Although the resolution has a non-binding character de facto, federal states, municipalities, other public actors and even private companies follow the call of the Bundestag and deny or withdraw public space from BDS activists and Palestine supporters; this even applies to discussions between supporters and opponents of the BDS campaign. There are many more reprisals against us and others. In the past, these were directed against the following persons and groups, among them:
The post-colonial, Cameroonian intellectual Achille Mbembe,
The author Kamila Shamsie
The rapper Talib Kweli
The Hip-Hop group Young Fathers
Jewish Voice for Peace in the Middle East
Palestine Speaks
They have all had to experience being disinvited by German institutions, having their prizes withdrawn and speeches cancelled due to false accusations based on their support for the BDS campaign. The above list is incomplete and the list of violations of the law is constantly growing. Even in its incomplete form, it should illustrate that the freedom rights of artists, intellectuals, thinkers from the whole world are massively restricted inside Germany. This is unacceptable, because it leads to a considerable restriction of the freedom of opinion, art and science in the Federal Republic of Germany.
Last but not least, the Palestinians and German-Palestinians themselves are most impacted by this resolution. On top of expulsion and exile, apartheid and occupation, omnipresent threat and humiliation, they are accused of anti-Semitism in Germany. The cry for justice and dignity and human rights is turned upside down and the oppressed is vilified and labelled by top politicians as alleged haters and racists.
Because the injustice for Palestinians is documented so well, the advocates of Israel's apartheid and occupation practice have only one means left: namely, to slander Palestinians.
We as BT3P will no longer stand by and watch these practices of the German Bundestag and the states, communities and municipalities. Our common history, which has brought us together coming from different walks of life, obliges us to stand up for universal human rights and against racism and colonialism. We will successfully overturn the resolution of the Bundestag and thus contribute to the general debate in Germany finally changing in favour of the oppressed Palestinians.
We and you as the new we: the BT3P
We invite all people, who are committed to human rights and support the Palestinian cause, to feel as an integral part of the BT3P initiative.
We also invite those people, who do not agree with all aspects of the BDS call, but for whom freedom of expression for human rights work is a priority, to engage in critical dialogue.
Support this important move for human rights of Palestinians in Germany. In keeping with the spirit of the 2005 BDS Call, we will humbly try to contribute to ensuring that in the region of Palestine/Israel in the future "all daughters and sons of the land between the river and the sea" can live together in freedom, equality and justice, regardless of their religious or ethnic background.
What can you do to support?
Spreading the word about the initiative and the news on all available channels, such as social media and email
Invitation to discussion rounds and lectures
Donations to cover the costs of the lawsuit
Public support by individuals and public figures
Public support by German and international organizations which endorse the values mentioned above (for example: trade unions, party organizations, foundations, human rights groups, liberation movements, BLM and LGBTQI groups...)
Critical exchange and cooperation
Press coverage (Please send press inquiries to: press@bt3p.org)
We are looking forward to hearing from you and to working together for this good cause. Will you be joining us?
Yours,
Judith Bernstein, Amir Ali, Christoph Glanz
Sources:
Nelson Mandela: Day of International Solidarity with the Palestinians*, Pretoria, South Africa, 4.12.1997, http://www.mandela.gov.za/mandela_speeches/1997/971204_palestinian.htm