Notice for the OJ

 

    

Action brought on 18 December 2001 by Yassin Abdullah Kadi against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities

    (Case T-315/01)

    Language of the case: English

An action against the Council of the European Union and the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 18 December 2001 by Yassin Abdullah Kadi, represented by Mr David Pannick QC, Mr Pushpinder Saini, Barrister, Mr Guy Martin and Mr Adam Tudor (Peter Carter-Ruck & Partners), of London (United Kingdom).

The applicant claims that the Court should:

listnum "WP List 1" l 1grant him a Declaration that Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2062/2001 of 19 October 2001 and Council Regulation (EC) No. 467/2001 of 6 March 2001 are, insofar as they relate to the applicant, void, and an Order for annulment in this regard;

listnum "WP List 1" \l 1order that the Council and/or the Commission pay the applicant's costs of this action.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The applicant in the present case, a citizen of Saudi Arabia with substantial financial interests within the European Union, challenges Regulation (EC) No 2062/2001 of 19 October 2001, amending, for the third time, Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001 prohibiting the export of certain goods and services to Afghanistan, strengthening the flight ban and extending the freezing of funds and other financial resources in respect of the Taliban of Afghanistan and repealing Regulation (EC) No 337/2000¹, in as much as it inserted the applicant's name into Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 467/2001. By Article 2/1 of the latter, all funds belonging to persons designated by the Taliban Sanctions Committee of the United Nations are to be frozen.

In support of its conclusions, the applicant submits that the measures in question:

- Amount to an interference with property rights, protected as a fundamental right within the Community legal order.

- Entitle the Council and the Commission, in violation of the right to a fair hearing, to freeze his assets and to maintain his freeze without granting him any opportunity to make submissions to these authorities seeking to persuade them to release his assets.

- Provide, in violation of the Community Law principle of effective judicial control, no remedy to the Applicant by which he may seek to challenge his inclusion in the list by obtaining an independent judicial assessment of the evidential basis for the interference with his rights.

According to the Applicant, an independent assessment by the Communty institutions or by any judicial body of the evidential basis for the freezing of its assets would show there is no basis for the allegations against it.

____________

¹ - OJEC L 277, of 20.10.2001, p. 25.