UN Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer was interviewed on i24 News about a recent U.S. Appeals Court decision to reinstate the sanctions against Francesca Albanese.
Bianca Zanini, i24 News: A U.S. federal court of appeals has reinstated sanctions against UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, who’s repeatedly been accused of antisemitism and anti-Israel activism for years. Albanese has used her position to accuse Israel of apartheid and genocide, saying things like the October 7 victims of the Hamas onslaught were killed “in response to Israeli oppression.”
Last year, she was charged with running an illegitimate campaign of economic and political warfare against the U.S. and Israel - Albanese were slapped with economic and travel sanctions. They were lifted last month by a judge and now temporarily reinstated by the Federal Court of Appeals, while litigation on her case proceeds.
And for more on this, we are joined by Hillel Neuer, the Executive Director of the United Nations Watch. Thank you so much for joining us. UN Watch has publicly welcomed this latest judge’s decision, why?
Hillel Neuer: This is a significant legal victory. Francesca Albanese is someone who, as you indicated, openly supports Hamas terrorism. Back in 2014, she was calling them “resistance.” As you said on October 7th, she defended their actions, saying that there was context to justify it.
She’s been condemned for a Holocaust inversion by the Canadian Government - which normally supports the UN very strongly, rarely criticizes experts. France and Germany have condemned her for antisemitism. The Netherlands last year said she should not be renewed because she had violated the UN Code of Conduct.
So this is someone who is subverting human rights, who supports terrorism, who incites antisemitism around the world with the blood libel accusing Israel of genocide. She’s the leader of that. She’s now been condemned, you could say, by the U.S. Appeals Court. For the sanctions, she tried to get them lifted. She did win a temporary victory in the lower court in the U.S. District of Columbia, but the appeals court, three judges have overturned that. And for now, for the duration of the appeal, which could last months or even longer, these sanctions are enforced. It sends an important message.
Bianca Zanini, i24 News: The UN has been accused generally of pervasive antisemitism in its halls. How does a case like this, and a decision like this, help fight that, if at all?
Hillel Neuer: Well, it sends an important message, because you know our organization, as well as several states, appealed to the United Nations, urged them to take responsibility. You have someone who is systematically breaching the UN Code of Conduct, which calls for impartiality, objectivity, tells them to check their facts. She doesn’t check any facts. She shares the most absurd, wild Hamas lies. She shares them all the time without any verification.
The UN refused to do a thing. Secreatry-General António Guterres refused to do a thing, and so the U.S. was the only one to take meaningful action with the sanctions. It sends a message, and we know that the moment the sanctions were announced on July 9 this past summer, a few days later, the Commission of Inquiry, which targets Israel, several of their leaders resigned, and it was reported that one of them, Navi Pillay, who was the chair of the inquiry, resigned because she had close family members in the U.S. and didn’t want to get sanctioned herself.
So it sends an important message. There’s a chilling effect against bad actors, and that needs to be maintained.
Bianca Zanini, i24 News: For those saying that this essentially is punishing someone for speaking up against the U.S. government and against Israel, what do you have to say to that?
Hillel Neuer: Well, the Executive Order signed by the President deals with actions, and she was actively encouraging the ICC - through briefs and other actions - to engage in targeting, weaponizing the ICC against Israel. So, these are actions, and they can be legitimately targeted. The judges who wrote the opinion of the appeals court said that she does not enjoy the First Amendment in this case, and certainly, as someone who fuels antisemitism, who supports terrorism, it’s a good thing that she be punished.
