BNP Paribas Hit with $21 Million Verdict Over Sudan Atrocities
A federal jury in New York has delivered a nearly $21 million verdict against BNP Paribas, France’s largest bank, finding it liable for facilitating access to the U.S. financial system for the Sudanese government during a period marked by widespread atrocities.
A woman and two men – all U.S. citizens who were displaced from Sudan and lost their homes and property – were awarded between $6.7 million and $7.3 million each on Friday, following approximately four hours of jury deliberation. The plaintiffs argued that the bank played a critical role in enabling a horrific chapter of modern history.
Enabling Persecution: The Plaintiffs’ Case
In a pretrial memo submitted on August 28, the plaintiffs asserted that BNP Paribas actively assisted the Sudanese government in carrying out “one of the most notorious campaigns of persecution in modern history.” Their attorney, Adam Levitt, expressed gratitude for the verdict, stating, “They’re very gratified that steps on the road toward justice are being achieved, and they’re happy that the bank is being held responsible for its abhorrent conduct.”
The case centers on the bank’s actions between 2002 and 2008, when it allegedly provided Sudanese authorities access to international money markets. This period coincided with escalating violence in the Darfur region, where an estimated 300,000 people were killed and 2.7 million displaced. The litigation extends beyond Darfur, encompassing government actions throughout the country.
BNP Paribas Disputes Liability, Plans Appeal
A spokesperson for BNP Paribas responded to the verdict, asserting it was “clearly wrong” and that the bank possesses “very strong grounds to appeal.” The spokesperson further claimed that the bank was unfairly prevented from presenting crucial evidence during the trial.
The bank’s defense rested on the argument that Sudan had alternative sources of funding and that BNP Paribas did not knowingly contribute to human rights abuses under the leadership of former President Omar al-Bashir. Lawyers for the bank maintained that “Human rights abuses in Sudan did not start with BNPP, did not end when BNPP left Sudan, and were not caused by BNPP.” They further emphasized that the bank “never participated in Sudanese military transactions in any way — it never financed Sudan’s purchase of arms, and there is no evidence linking any specific transaction to Plaintiffs’ injuries.”
A Bellwether Trial with Broader Implications
Levitt, representing the plaintiffs, characterized the case as a “bellwether trial,” suggesting the findings could be applied to a larger class-action lawsuit involving approximately 23,000 Sudanese refugees who are U.S. citizens. However, the BNP Paribas spokesperson clarified that the verdict is specific to the three plaintiffs and “should not have broader application beyond this decision.”
This case echoes a 2014 settlement in which BNP Paribas agreed to pay nearly $9 billion to resolve a case involving similar allegations – specifically, processing billions of dollars in transactions for clients in Sudan, Cuba, and Iran, and entering a guilty plea in New York.
Sudan’s Ongoing Crisis
The verdict arrives amidst ongoing turmoil in Sudan, which has been gripped by civil war for over two years. This conflict has triggered one of the world’s most severe displacement and hunger crises, according to aid organizations. Al-Bashir, who has been charged by the International Criminal Court with crimes including genocide, remains detained in a military facility in northern Sudan, though he has not yet been extradited to The Hague.
. The outcome of the appeal will be closely watched, as it could set a precedent for holding financial institutions accountable for their role in facilitating human rights abuses abroad.
