[UPDATE Jan. 20, 2005: The Saudi Embassy website does now have the press statement.

Also, here's the full text of the US District Court of New York's decision (this is a 62-page PDF document). You'll note that most of the cases were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, not as the result of a finding of fact, that is, innocence or guilt.]

Saudis Cleared in 9/11 Cases
Barbara Ferguson, Arab News

WASHINGTON, 20 January 2005 — The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, three Saudi princes, several Saudi businessmen and Saudi financial institutions were dismissed as defendants on Tuesday in lawsuits accusing them of supporting Al-Qaeda before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Manhattan Federal Judge Richard Casey cited the report by the Sept. 11 Commission, which found no evidence that Saudi leaders provided support to the hijackers.

“The US State Department has not designated the Kingdom a state sponsor of terrorism,” said Judge Casey.

He specifically dismissed as defendants Prince Sultan, second deputy premier and minister of defense and aviation; Saudi Ambassador to Britain Prince Turki Al-Faisal; Prince Mohammed Al-Faisal, Sheikh Saleh Kamel and Dallah Al-Baraka, among others.

The 9/11 lawsuits allege more than 200 defendants provided material support to Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda.

Prince Turki said he was happy that the court rejected all charges against him. “The charges were not true at all. I spent a long time after Osama Bin Laden to bring him to justice”. He said he considered Bin Laden an evil man who violated Islamic rules by killing innocent people.

Prince Turki thanked the American justice system that acquitted him of all charges.

“The court has reviewed the complaints in their entirety and finds no allegations from which it can infer that the princes knew the charities to which they donated were fronts for Al-Qaeda,” Casey said. “There are no such factual bases presented, there are only conclusions.”

“This should restore confidence in the Kingdom about the American justice system,” said Martin McMahon, a Washington-based lawyer who represents several of the defendants in the lawsuits. “The judge granted a motion to dismiss this case. In our case it was granted because the plaintiffs failed to state a claim that could be granted. Which means they didn’t have a case,” said McMahon, head of McMahon Associates.

Among financial institutions dismissed as defendants were Al-Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, Arab Bank, and Al-Baraka Investment and Development Corporation.

Casey said he found no basis for a bank’s liability for injuries resulting from attacks funded by money passing through it on routine banking business.

“The judge ruled that just because you’re a bank, or investing in a bank, through which money travels that allegedly was funneled to terrorists groups, it is not enough to file a claim against that defendant,” said Wendell Belew, who also represents defendants in the 9/11 lawsuits.

“In the case of our clients, Saleh Kamel and Dallah Al-Baraka, the allegations were that they invested in various banks,” said Belew of the DC-based Belew Law Firm. “The judge decided that was not sufficient to establish any kind of liability.”

But they say the 9/11 lawsuits have tarnished the Saudi businessmen’s international reputation. “With regard to Saleh Kamel, many of the allegations made in the complaint were not factually true,” said McMahon.

“Sheikh Saleh and other individuals in this case have been accused of horrendous crimes. Where do they go to restore their reputations?” said McMahon.

Tuesday’s dismissal did not mention several Islamic charities listed in the 9/11 lawsuits, that alleges Saudi money was given to Islamic charities to fund terrorism

“Although this is a favorable decision, it is by no means the end of problems for Saudi Arabia and others mentioned in the lawsuits,” said McMahon.

“On the other hand, just because a party did not get dismissed at this stage, it does not mean that they will not prevail, but it does mean they will have to put up a vigorous defense,” said Belew.

The judge permitted lawsuits to proceed against the Saudi Binladen Group, the successor to a construction company founded by Bin Laden’s father, which is now one of the largest engineering and construction companies in the Arab world.

He said additional legal materials would be necessary to decide whether the Saudi Binladen Group “purposefully directed its activities at the United States.”

Qorvis Communication, the American PR firm that handles lobbying for Saudi Arabia has issued the following press release for the Saudi Embassy in Washington. The text of the release does not appear (as of 22:45 on Jan. 19) on the Saudi Embassy website.

WASHINGTON [January 19, 2005] — Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, issued the following statement:

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is very gratified with the decision by the
United States District Court of New York to dismiss lawsuits against
the Saudi government, government officials, leading financial
institutions and prominent businessmen, who were charged with financing the 9/11 attacks.

“The decision of the court is consistent with the findings of the 9/11
Commission, which concluded after exhaustive investigation that there
is no evidence of involvement in or financial support for terrorism by
the Saudi government or the Royal family.

“The court has dismissed claims against two government officials: Saudi
Minister of Defense HRH Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz and Saudi
Ambassador to the United Kingdom, HRH Prince Turki Al-Faisal.

“The cases were also dismissed against a number of other parties
including HRH Prince Mohamed Al-Faisal, CEO of three financial institutions
in Saudi Arabia; Bakr, Omar, Tariq Binladin, current managers of the
large engineering and construction company Saudi Binladin Group; Mohammad
Abdullah Aljomaih’s Estate, Saleh Abdullah Kamel, Abdulrahman bin
Mahfouz, all prominent Saudi businessmen.

“The court also granted the motions to dismiss of three Saudi financial
institutions: Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank and Al Baraka
Investment Company.

“In the aftermath of 9/11, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been
confronted with many false charges. As the real facts emerge, we hope we can
all move forward in the spirit of cooperation and mutual support, which
is so critical to winning the war on terrorism. The people of Saudi
Arabia sympathize with all victims of terrorism, and Saudi Arabia will
continue to lead efforts to eliminate terrorism worldwide.”

(The Ambassador and his wife, HRH Princess Haifa Al-Faisal, were
voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs from these lawsuits in 2004.)

Agence France Presse is reporting the story, as is the BBC.

Royal Embassy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia


January:20:2005 - 00:21 | Comments & Trackbacks (10) | Permalink
10 Responses to “Saudis Cleared in 9/11 Suits”
  1. 1
    Armies of Liberation » Some Links Pinged With:
    January:22:2005 - 22:57 

    [...] ocument.body.disabled = false;’,100);

    1/22/2005

    Some Links

    Saudi Government Cleared in 9/11 Civil Trial German Media Bias Begin [...]

  2. 2
    Outside The Beltway Trackbacked With:
    January:20:2005 - 07:17 

    Saudis Cleared in 9/11 Cases
    Saudis Cleared in 9/11 Cases (Arab News)
    The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, three Saudi princes, several Saudi businessmen and Saudi financial institutions were dismissed as defendants on Tuesday in lawsuits accusing them of supporting Al-Qaeda before the S…

  3. 3
    Doug Said:
    January:20:2005 - 08:50 

    Defense attorneys maintain that their clients are as pure as the driven snow. Surprise, surprise, surprise, surprise.

  4. 4
    John Said:
    January:20:2005 - 11:58 

    Doug, defense attorneys certainly do do that. It becomes far more important, though, when a court does it.

  5. 5
    Osama_Been_Forgotten Said:
    January:20:2005 - 17:14 

    Doug, defense attorneys certainly do do that. It becomes far more important, though, when a court does it.

    Of course, it’s their JOB to do it. That’s what Defense Attorneys are for. (one of my pet peeves about the Right – their criticism of people who defend accused criminals).

    Whether or not the court is right? Who knows? I didn’t see the evidence presented, etc.
    Of course, given their VERY strong political influence in this country, I doubt a truly fair trial was ever going to happen.

    And, actually, what the court concluded, was that there is no evidence.
    Of course. In today’s opaque world of finance, it’s almost impossible to prove a crime on this basis. They learned a lesson with the BCCI takedown over a decade ago. Keep a shredder on hand at all times.

  6. 6
    John Said:
    January:20:2005 - 23:08 

    I’ve got no problem whatsoever with defense attorneys on the whole. I do have problems with certain kinds of lawyering, but that’s another story.

    But I have to say that if you’re proposing that the Executive is corrupt, the Judiciary is corrupt, and the Legislature is corrupt, you’re starting to make me look into tin foil futures.

    The cases were mostly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, not a finding of innocence. I’m posting a link to the Court findings as an update to the original post.

  7. 7
    Dean's World Trackbacked With:
    January:25:2005 - 08:01 

    Saudis cleared
    Crossroads Arabia notes that a number of important Saudies who were in legal trouble here in the U.S. recently had their charges thrown out of c…

  8. 8
    Amanda Said:
    January:26:2005 - 13:22 

    Hopefully one of you can help my understanding of the 9/11 lawsuits. I read an article from a couple of years ago that a lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the District of Colmubia by over 900 people against Saudi Arabia and others. However, the ruling issued this week that cleared the Saudi government and others was handed down by the New York District Court. Does anyone know if the orginial case got shifted to NY?

  9. 9
    John Said:
    January:26:2005 - 15:50 

    To the best of my reckoning, here’s what happened:

    Several suits were filed, both in the Washington, DC and New York District Courts. When the same/very similar suits are filed in different District Courts, they are usually consolidated in one or the other.

    In this case, all lawsuits concerning 9/11 were moved to the NY District Court as the most apt venue, since that was where the WTC towers were and that’s where most of the victims were when they were killed.

    The Air Transportation Security Act appears to be the legislation ordering the consolidation of the suits and unification of venue in New York.

  10. 10
    Crossroads Arabia » Up-Tick in US-Saudi Relations Pinged With:
    September:22:2005 - 21:54 

    [...] This decision, like the one Judge Casey made earlier this year, does not address issues of culpability, but rather the matter of jurisdiction. By John @ 21:54 | Permalink No Comments » [...]

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

spacer
  • Advertising Info

    Interested in advertising on or sponsoring Crossroads Arabia? Contact me for more information.

  • Copyright Notice

    All original materials copyright, 2004-2012. Other materials copyrighted by their respective owners.