Agents working for Qatar threatened witnesses and issued bribes to thwart an alleged terror funding case brought in London and to avoid derailing the Gulf state’s hosting of the 2022 Fifa World Cup, a court has heard.
Eight Syrian refugees were attempting to sue Doha Bank claiming that it knowingly facilitated the transfer of funds to al-Nusra Front, a jihadist group that controlled part of northern Syria, which forced them to flee for their lives overseas.
Four of the claimants discontinued their case last year “as a result of a conspiracy to pervert the course of the proceedings”, Sir Max Hill KC, representing them, told the high court in London on Thursday.
Hill, a former director of public prosecutions, said in written submissions that examples of interference with the case included the claimants’ translator being bribed and asking them to sign untranslated documents they did not understand, in particular dis-instructing their legal representatives.
It is also alleged that “fake” plaintiffs were put forward in order to access confidential information about the claimants, contrary to an anonymity order preventing their identification.
Additionally, Hill said a witness who was a former agent of the Syrian ministry of defence – who could give a first-hand account of the bank’s alleged involvement with terrorist financing – received death and kidnap threats, a tracking device was fitted to his car and his home was targeted by masked men and bugged. The witness eventually attempted to withdraw his evidence.
Hill said: “The motivation of the state is abundantly clear – taking steps to make sure that this did not result in a trial or adverse finding in the run-up to the World Cup.”
He told the court the interference nevertheless continued after the tournament and said there were “very real connections” between the bank and the Qatari state.
Hill said the usual rule that claimants who discontinue a case should pay the defendant’s costs should not apply in the current case because there was an “enduring, grave and unrelenting” criminal conspiracy to derail the case.
He cited the UK counter-terrorism police unit SO15 who, after multiple complaints, said in February 2021 – and reaffirmed in July this year – that a scoping exercise “concluded that there is information and evidence to support [the allegation of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice]”. Hill said Doha Bank should pay the claimants’ costs.
Hannah Brown KC, representing the bank, which wants its legal costs paid, said in written submissions: “Nothing in the evidence supposedly showing the alleged interference has anything whatsoever to do with the bank … There is no evidence that the bank has sought to interfere with the due progress of these proceedings or act improperly or unlawfully in relation to them in any way at all.”
She told the court that while the bank “has a connection to the Qatari state and ruling family”, the al-Thani family has more than 20,000 members and allegations that it was closely linked to the family were “nonsense”.
Brown claimed that evidence as to why the proceedings collapsed was “variously incoherent, or close to it, contradictory or simply unclear”.
The case is expected to conclude on Friday, with judgment given at a later date.
