The classification of hundreds of people and organizations as terrorists has been one of the most controversial aspects of the socalled “war on terror”. On 20 October 2009, together with the Free University of Brussels, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) organized a well attended conference about the terrorism lists of the EU and the UN, and the compatibility of these lists with fundamental and human rights.

Lawyers from Europe, the US, and Canada, as well as academics and EU representatives, took part in discussions on the practical experiences of lawyers working on behalf of listed persons and groups, the issue of the separation of executive and judicial power, and future developments and reforms of the terrorist listing system. The conference was supported by Cordaid, the Transnational Institute, Statewatch, Berghof Peace Support, and the Amnesty International EU Office.

EU Counterterrorism Coordinator Mr. De Kerchove emphasized the administrative and political character of sanction measures against individuals and groups. He welcomed recent judgments by European courts on EU terrorism lists, in which the courts reaffirmed and strengthened the fundamental procedural safeguards and standards in place to protect affected persons and groups, which have to be respected before putting a person or group on a list.

De Kerchove made it clear that the purpose of listing is based primarily on political decisions regarding the addition of persons or organizations to the list, rather than freezing their assets. De Kerchove’s open acknowledgment that the explicit legislative aim of cutting off revenue streams for terrorist activities is not the main purpose of the lists was met with criticism from British lawyer Marc Muller. Mr. Muller further noted that there is an insufficient distinction made between "Jihadterrorists" and liberation movements. In particular, he considered the repressive action against Kurdish and Tamil communities in Europe as disastrous. While the court decisions were to be welcomed, there was still a lack of respect for fundamental procedural standards.

These matters were further explored by three lawyers from Europe and North America on the next panel. They clearly presented the consequences of listing procedures for individuals to the conference participants. In the following discussion, participants criticized the practice of excluding the judiciary from overseeing decisions of the executive branch, especially when judicial standards cautioned against the listing of persons and groups without presenting evidence or respecting fundamental procedural safeguards. This led to the conclusion that cooperation as well as a balance of power between government branches is of utmost importance to secure fair decisions.

The conference concluded with a panel on future perspectives and reform proposals regarding terrorism lists. It was emphasized that the entire system of listing suspected persons is highly dubious and that its abolishment is necessary. The necessary legal framework for the control and prevention of suspicious financial transactions can be found in the relevant criminal and criminal procedure law, as well as in European cooperation agreements. Only the use of regular proceedings can guarantee the rule of law,protect fundamental human rights, and secure procedural safeguards such as the right to an effective remedy and access to a court.