BAFA Rejects Palestinian Complaint Against Axel Springer: Objection Filed

Berlin –  5 May, 2025

The German Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA) has rejected the complaint submitted by Palestinian villages and individuals against Axel Springer SE. The reason? BAFA insists the complainants had to reveal their full identities, even though the office previously assured that these at-risk individuals would be protected. This decision is a direct threat to the safety of Palestinians resisting land theft by Israeli settlers. 

Today, we formally filed an objection to this decision.

The rejection by BAFA disregards clear precedent and written correspondence confirming that BAFA could, and would, accommodate complainants’ protection needs. On 15 January 2025, BAFA officials assured our legal team that applicants under threat would not be forced to expose their identities. Now, without warning or further dialogue, BAFA’s leadership has reversed course, without even granting the applicants the opportunity to adjust their submissions accordingly.

Meanwhile, the violence intensifies. Over recent weeks, a spike in settler attacks has devastated Palestinian communities near illegal settlements—homes torched, farmland razed, families threatened. BAFA’s decision means those very people must now expose their names to Axel Springer, a media conglomerate that has publicly embraced positions aligned with Israeli state policy and whose subsidiary, Yad2, facilitates land grabs in occupied territory.

Despite offering alternative mechanisms to confirm the identity of our clients, mechanisms BAFA has accepted in other high-risk cases, our proposals were dismissed. This creates a chilling precedent: Palestinians must either risk exposure or forfeit their right to seek justice.

Equally alarming is BAFA’s claim that villages like Iskaka, Marda, and Taybeh cannot file complaints because they are not “individualisable.” This interpretation defies both the letter and spirit of German law, which recognizes the rights of communities and legal persons when their land and livelihoods are under threat.

The rejection is legally flawed and morally indefensible.

We urge BAFA to reconsider its stance. Justice should not require the most vulnerable to unmask themselves to those complicit in their dispossession. Germany must uphold its obligations under the Supply Chain Act and international law, not undermine them.

Legal Context

The original complaint, filed by individual Palestinians and the villages of Iskaka, Marda, and Taybeh, accuses Axel Springer SE of contributing to illegal land grabbing and serious human rights abuses in the occupied Palestinian territory through its Israeli subsidiary Yad2. Yad2 facilitates property listings and sales in Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law and contribute directly to the dispossession of Palestinians.

The complaint is grounded in Germany’s Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG), which obliges German companies to prevent human rights violations in their subsidiaries and supply chains. Axel Springer is required by law to act on risks it directly controls, yet continues to profit from a platform fueling illegal settlement expansion.

The complaint also aligns with the International Court of Justice’s 2024 Advisory Opinion, which reaffirmed that states must prohibit business activities that sustain Israel’s unlawful occupation. By pursuing this case, we are calling on Germany to implement that obligation and ensure that German companies are not complicit in serious violations of international law.