In 2021, the Danish bunkering (ship fueling) company Dan-Bunkering was convicted of violations of EU sanctions for its involvement in shipping jet fuel to Russian forces in Syria. The shipments occurred during the first two years of Russia’s intervention in Syria, from 2015-2017, when Russian aircraft conducted thousands of bombing sorties against civilian targets in Syria cities, resulting in the deaths of thousands of people, such as during the Siege of Aleppo.

The Danish investigation found that 172,000 tonnes of jet fuel worth about 647 million Danish crowns ($101 million) was sold in 33 trades between 2015 and 2017 to Russian companies acting on behalf of the Russian military, with delivery in the eastern Mediterranean.

The court found that Dan-Bunkering played a key role in both facilitating financial transactions for Russian logistics companies in violation of EU sanctions on Syria and that they facilitated the logistics involved in the supply chain of fuel from ports in the eastern Mediterranean to the Syrian port of Banyas.

The court also found Dan-Bunkering’s parent company, Bunker Holding, and the latter’s CEO, liable as accomplices to the sanctions evasion. Dan-Bunkering was fined DKK 30 million ($4.6 million) and profits of DKK 15 million were confiscated. Bunker Holdings was fined DKK 4 million and its CEO was given a four month suspended sentence.

Sources:

Danish fuel trader convicted over exports to war-torn Syria, Reuters, 14 December 2021

Court finds Danish company Dan-Bunkering guilty of violating EU sanctions with supply of jet fuel to Russian military in Syria, Syrian Archive, 16 December 2021.

Sources:

court documents

Transactions that provide material assistance to international crimes may be prosecuted using various forms of accomplice liability. Where those transactions take place with entities designated under national or international sanctions regimes, prosecutors may opt to prosecute the same transactions as sanctions violations.

In 2006, Dutch businessman Guus Kouwenhoven was charged with violating UN sanctions and aiding and abetting war crimes committed in Liberia.

The case was based on the defendant’s time as Director of Operations of the Oriental Timber Company (OTC) and of the Royal Timber Company (RTC) in Liberia, the biggest timber operations in Liberia. It was alleged that while serving in these positions van Kouwenhoven had close ties with Charles Taylor (himself later convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity by the Special Court for Sierra Leone) and facilitated the import of arms for Taylor in contravention of UN Security Council resolutions. The United Nations Security Council sanctioned Kouwenhoven (travel ban, asset freeze) in 2001, qualifying him as “an arms trafficker in breach of Resolution 1343 of the Security Council” in addition to being “someone who supported the efforts of ex-President Taylor in destabilizing Sierra Leone to gain illegal access to its diamonds”. Kouwenhoven was arrested in the Netherlands on March 18, 2005 but later fled to South Africa.

According to the prosecution “the militias hired by the former timber companies belonging to this Dutchman, are accused of participating in the massacre of civilians…Guus van Kouwenhoven is accused of having supplied the arms to the militias to enable them to carry out these crimes” (translation from Dutch). The arms, vehicles and installations to store the weapons were allegedly supplied to militia who then used them in a number of massacres committed during the Liberian civil war.

On June 7, 2006, the Dutch court acquitted van Kouwenhoven of the charges of war crimes. However, he was sentenced to an 8-year prison term, for having violated the UN arms embargo on Liberia. Both prosecution and defense appealed and on March 19, 2007, van Kouwenhoven was conditionally released pending his appeal. The appeal resulted in his acquittal in March 2008. This result was appealed and, after rulings on appeal and at the Dutch Supreme Court, Kouwenhoven was convicted of aiding and abetting war crimes and arms trafficking and sentenced to 19 years. In convicting him, the court held that Kouwenhoven’s provision of weapons entailed that he consciously accepted the probability that war crimes and/or crimes against humanity would be committed.

The defendant was charged with the following offences:
Complicity in War Crimes: “The charges refer to a number of actions that have been penalized under the Criminal Law in Wartime Act (of the Netherlands) …(and )…articles 47 (complicity) and 57 of the Penal Code;”

Sanctions violations: Economic Offenses Act…articles 1, opening lines and under 2° (old), 1, opening lines and under 1°, 2 and 6 of the; articles 2 (old), 2, 3 (old), 3 and 13 of the Sanctions Act 1977;

Sanctions violations: Article 2 of the Liberian Sanctions Regulations 2001 of The Netherlands;

Sanctions violations: Article 2 of the Liberian Sanctions Regulations 2002 of the Netherlands;

Arms trafficking: ML1 and ML2 of the Schedule to the Import and Export Decree on Strategic Goods.

Status

Sources:

Guus Kouwenhoven, TRIAL International case summary

Guus K., alle ontwikkelingen, de Rechtspraak (Dutch courts), including all court documents and case history

Transactions that provide material assistance to international crimes may be prosecuted using various forms of accomplice liability. Where those transactions take place with entities designated under national or international sanctions regimes, prosecutors may also opt to prosecute the same transactions as sanctions violations.

In 2020, French authorities launched an investigation into BNP Paris in connection with its alleged role in providing financial services to the government of Sudan. The investigation was launched in response to a complaint filed by victims of crimes committed by the government of Sudan between 2002 - 2008. In 2024, the investigation was reported to to be ongoing (AFP).

BNP Paribas has declined to comment on the ongoing investigations.

In a 2014 plea deal with US authorities BNP Paribas plead guilty to charges it violated US sanctions by providing financial services to Sudan, Cuba and Iran. Charges in the sanctions case included that BNPP used a system of proxy banks “to process approximately $6.4 billion on behalf of Sudanese sanctioned entities”. As part of the plea deal BNP Paribas admitted the bank had acted for the Sudanese government during the period 2002-2008. BNP Paribas was required to pay a USD $8.9 billion penalty.

In 2024, a US judge ordered a separate law suit to proceed.

The criminal complaint filed in France by victims, with the support of FIDH, alleged that “by providing the Sudanese government with credit facilities, allowing the government to export petrol and access foreign money markets…the bank facilitated the commission of human rights violations amounting to international crimes by the Sudanese government.”(FIDH)

The crime base upon which the complain is based consists of allegations that “the government – through its military and security forces and Janjaweed militias – committed widespread human rights violations amounting to international crimes (including torture, crimes against humanity and genocide) against Sudanese civilians…tens of thousands of Sudanese activists and ordinary civilians were killed, forcibly displaced from their homes, detained, tortured and subjected to inhumane treatment or raped and subjected to other forms of sexual violence.” (FIDH)

Sources

BNP Paribas Agrees to Plead Guilty and to Pay $8.9 Billion for Illegally Processing Financial Transactions for Countries Subject to U.S. Economic Sanctions, US Department of Justice, 30 June 2014

Judicial Investigation Opened into BNP Paribas’ Role in Atrocities in Sudan, FIDH, 11 October 2020

“9 victimes soudanaises portent plainte contre BNP Paribas pour complicité de crimes contre l’humanité”, FIDH 26 September 2019