Lawfare Update: Al Haq Canada case dismissed with partial costs

NGO Monitor
September 2009 Digest: Vol. 8, No. 1
29 October 09

(Another one for the good guys!)

On September 18, 2009, a Montreal court dismissed a lawfare case brought by the Bil’in Village Council, with the assistance of the Palestinian NGO “Al Haq” (funded by Netherlands, Ireland, Norway, Sweden [via Diakonia], Ford Foundation, Christian Aid, Norway) and Israeli attorney Michael Sfard. The case was filed in June 2008 against three Canadian corporations involved in construction projects in the town of Kiryat Sefer (Modi’in Ilit). The village council and Al Haq claimed that these corporations were “aiding, abetting, assisting and conspiring with Israel, the Occupying Power in the West Bank, in carrying out an illegal act” and acting in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

The Court found that the plaintiffs had “select[ed] a forum having little connection to the Action in order to inappropriately gain a juridical advantage,” and that there was no basis to plaintiffs’ claim that it was impossible to obtain a remedy in the Israeli court system. It further noted that plaintiffs had relied on judicial statutes that require the consent of the Canadian Attorney General – consent the plaintiffs never obtained. In addition to dismissing the case, the Canadian judge awarded the defendants partial costs (part of the defendant’s legal fees), underlining the particularly frivolous nature of the case.

This dismissal is the latest rejection of Al Haq’s strategy to exploit Western courts for political goals (“lawfare”). Its two suits (2006 and 2009) filed against British government officials to stop weapons sales to Israel were also rejected.

Top Left-wing Activists Face Lawsuit For Plagiarism

Maya Sela
Haaretz Correspondent
12 August 09

The Israel Democracy Institute and one of its researchers, Anat Roth, are suing attorney Michael Sfard and Col (res.) Shaul Arieli, two well-known left-wing activists, for copyright violation.

The suit, filed in the Tel Aviv District Court, states that in their book about the separation fence, "Homa u'Mehdal, Geder Hahafrada - Bitahon or Hamdanut" ("Wall and Failure, the Separation Fence - Security or Greed"), Sfard and Arieli plagiarized material written and edited by the plaintiffs without seeking permission or even properly crediting the author.

This material included "substantial sections" of Roth's 2005 study of settler campaigns against the fence and the disengagement from the Gaza Strip, including "exclusive, unique interviews" that she conducted with settler leaders over many months.

Upon discovering this, Roth and the IDI demanded that Sfard, Arieli and their publishers - two divisions of Yedioth Ahronoth Books, which were also named as respondents - halt sales of the book, remove unsold books from stores and publish an apology in the press. Not only did the respondents refuse, they are still printing and selling the book, and even planning to translate it into several foreign languages, the suit said.

The suit seeks damages of NIS 300,000.
.