Men lose battle to be taken off UN terror list

TWO men targeted by the Irish and British Governments under international anti-terrorist measures yesterday lost their European legal battle to be removed from a list of suspects.

Chafiq Ayadi, a Tunisian national living in Dublin, and Faraj Hassan, a Libyan currently in Brixton Prison, London, appear on a constantly-updated United Nations list of individuals considered to be associated with terrorist groups.

All those on the list have their assets and all other financial resources frozen.

Ayadi has also been refused a taxi driver’s licence to operate in Dublin.

Hassan is in jail pending the result of extradition proceedings brought by the Italian authorities on alleged terrorism-related offences.

Both men claimed their efforts to have their names removed had been rejected by the Irish and British authorities, and asked the European Court of First Instance to intervene.

Yesterday, the judges dismissed the case but insisted that anyone on the list had the right to seek removal of their names through national authorities.

The list was set up by resolutions of the UN Security Council in the wake of the attacks on New York and Washington in September 2001 and adopted by the 25 EU countries.

Removal from the list involves making a request to a UN Sanctions Committee via the country of residence of the person concerned.

The judges upheld the power of the EU to order the freezing of individuals’ funds “in the context of the battle against international terrorism”.

The judgment said: “Such a measure does not infringe the universally recognised fundamental rights of the human person.”

In the case of Ayadi, the freezing of funds had been “a particularly drastic measure”, but it did not prevent an individual leading “a satisfactory personal, family and social life, given the circumstances”.

The judges said being on the list did not forbid a person from carrying on a trade or business activity, although income could be regulated.

“The grant of a taxi driver’s licence to Mr Ayadi and his hiring of a car may theoretically be the object of a derogation from the freezing of his funds. It is, however, for the national authorities to determine whether such a derogation may be granted and then to ensure that it is reviewed and implemented, in co-operation with the Sanctions Committee.”

The court also said Ayadi and Hassan “must avail themselves of the opportunities for judicial remedy offered by domestic law”.