Halkbank denied immunity in US prosecution case

Halkbank denied immunity in US prosecution case
Publish:
A+ A-
The US Supreme Court has denied immunity to Halkbank, a Turkish state-owned bank, in a case involving the violation of Iranian sanctions. The bank had argued that as an entity wholly owned by a foreign state, it was immune from prosecution in the US.

The Supreme Court of the United States has rejected the claim made by Halkbank, a Turkish state-owned bank, that it is immune from prosecution in the United States in a case involving the violation of Iranian sanctions.

The court, which consists of nine judges, ruled that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not shield Halkbank from criminal proceedings in the US, despite its claim that it is a commercial entity that is wholly owned by a foreign state, VOA Turkish reported.

The ruling stated that "Halkbank's argument that a wholly commercial company, wholly owned by a foreign state, can participate in a crime that affects American citizens and threatens American national security, but cannot be held accountable in American courts, finds no support in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act."

Halkbank had also argued that foreign states or their instruments could be immune from prosecution outside the scope of the law, but the Supreme Court did not express any opinion on this argument.

The case against Halkbank stems from allegations that the bank helped Iran evade US sanctions by processing billions of dollars in transactions through the US financial system. The US government has charged Halkbank with conspiracy, bank fraud, and money laundering.

In response to the Supreme Court's ruling, Halkbank's lawyer Lisa Blatt argued that no foreign state or its instrument had ever been tried in a criminal case in the history of the world. However, Eric Feigin, the lawyer representing the US Department of Justice, warned that granting immunity to Halkbank could turn it into a "crime hub" for other states in the future.

The Supreme Court has now ordered the lower court to re-evaluate Halkbank's claim of immunity within the scope of the law. This decision could have implications for other foreign banks that operate in the US, as it clarifies the circumstances in which a foreign entity can be held accountable for criminal activities that affect American interests.

Legal experts say that the majority at the Constitutional Court has adopted the view that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) cannot provide immunity for Halkbank in the case of violating Iran sanctions, and therefore cannot be an obstacle to the bank's prosecution. The request from the Constitutional Court for the lower court to re-evaluate whether foreign states or instruments have immunity under precedent principles is considered a positive development for Halkbank.

Commenting on the decision to VOA Turkish, Professor Ingrid Wuerth Brunk from Vanderbilt University says, "The biggest victory for Halkbank would have been for the Constitutional Court to make a ruling that the bank is exempt from prosecution. Then the case would have been dropped. But that did not happen. Nevertheless, Halkbank has now obtained the opportunity to bring the question of immunity within the scope of precedent principles before the court."