News

Kashef v. BNP Paribas: A Bank Held Accountable Under Swiss Law

  • 06/04/2026 by Kristina Hon - Senior legal counsel, Civitas Maxima

Recently there was an important development in the field of corporate accountability that is worth highlighting. In October 2025, a federal jury in the Southern District of New York, in the United States, found BNP Paribas liable for assisting the Government of Sudan in committing human rights violations between 1997 and 2011 by facilitating banking transactions on its behalf. The three Sudanese plaintiffs, chosen as a representative sample from a much larger class action group, were awarded a total of almost $21 million in damages.

In previous litigation against the bank, BNP Paribas pleaded guilty in 2014 to criminal charges of violating U.S. sanctions against Sudan (as well as against Cuba and Iran) and paid an almost $9 billion penalty.

The current civil case for reparations, Kashef et al. v. BNP Paribas, was originally filed under state tort law as an alternative to the more traditional, but much narrower, pathways under U.S. federal law for individuals to seek compensation and accountability for human rights abuses committed abroad. Interestingly, the case was ultimately decided under Swiss law because it was the Geneva branch of BNP Paribas that conducted the financial transactions, and Switzerland was determined to have the greatest interests at stake in the outcome of the case.

BNP Paribas has appealed the judgment on a number of legal grounds, including that the judge misinterpreted and misapplied the Swiss law at issue. The bank argues that because the Government of Sudan cannot be held liable in Switzerland, neither can BNP Paribas, and that in any event its actions were lawful under Swiss sanctions and banking law. On 29 May 2026, the Governments of Switzerland and the United States, together with several academics and industry bodies, filed proposed amicus briefs in support of the bank’s appeal, with Switzerland’s intervention underscoring the sovereign interest it claims in the case’s outcome.

The appeal will be worth watching as the stakes for closing the corporate impunity gap, especially in the financial sector, are high.