The Council of the European Union is facing a potential landmark defamation lawsuit in a Hamburg court, stemming from its September 2023 sanctions decision against businessman Alisher Usmanov. The case hinges on claims made by the Council regarding Usmanov’s alleged ties to President Putin and his purported role in solving the Russian leader’s business issues. Usmanov’s defense lawyer, Joachim Steinhoefel, asserts that these claims are not only unfounded but also damaging to Usmanov’s reputation. If a pending appeal before Germany’s Federal Court of Justice is successful, it could pave the way for this unprecedented legal battle.
At the heart of the controversy is the Council’s reliance on media reports to substantiate its allegations against Usmanov. Steinhoefel highlights that one assertion, which claims Usmanov “reportedly fronted for President Putin,” originated from Forbes, and he argues that this should not be regarded as a factual assertion but rather as an opinion. Both the Hamburg Regional Court and Forbes itself have disputed the legitimacy of this claim, suggesting that media opinion cannot serve as factual evidence in the context of sanctions. Further complicating matters, Steinhoefel points out that other allegations, including a statement from Austrian newspaper Kurier that labeled Usmanov as Putin’s “favorite oligarch,” have been deemed unlawful and banned from circulation.
The implication here suggests a broader issue regarding the Council’s methodology in issuing sanctions. Steinhoefel contends that the Council often accepts unverified media sources without adequate scrutiny. He asserts that the legal precedent under EU law mandates a higher standard of evidence, requiring that claims be based on multiple reliable sources and supported by consistent facts. This raises questions about the integrity of the information used by the Council in formulating its sanctions, as several media outlets have since corrected or retracted claims about Usmanov’s political connections, undermining the Council’s rationale.
The lawsuit also challenges the Council’s characterization of Usmanov as someone who “actively supported” the destabilization of Ukraine due to his role as a businessperson. Steinhoefel argues that merely owning shares in a profitable enterprise and complying with tax obligations should not be misconstrued as political support for government policies. This assertion raises fundamental legal issues about the interpretation of economic activities and personal interests in the context of international law and foreign policy. Steinhoefel frames this as a concerning inversion of rights, suggesting that to avoid such an interpretation, individuals would have to engage in illegal activities or relinquish their lawful business interests, a position that contradicts principles of a democratic society.
Moreover, the legal strategy employed by Steinhoefel brings to light issues surrounding the Council’s motivations behind imposing sanctions on influential business figures. He describes this as “coercion by proxy,” arguing that the Council seeks to use business leaders as tools to influence Russian governmental policy. This tactic, in Steinhoefel’s view, violates fundamental democratic principles by manipulating legal and economic rights as a means of political leverage, thereby creating an ethical dilemma regarding state intervention in private conduct.
Initially, the Council was deemed immune from lawsuits in German courts, a ruling contested by Steinhoefel, who cites the German Basic Law that guarantees judicial redress for violations of fundamental rights. He has now escalated the case to Germany’s Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe. While the lawsuit does not directly contest the validity of the sanctions against Usmanov, it seeks a judicial order to prevent the Council from disseminating the alleged defamatory statements, with a decision from the Court pending. This case not only highlights critical issues regarding the intersection of law and sanctions but also underscores the importance of accountability in the actions of EU institutions.
