• International law doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it demands concrete action -- like halting listings of Israeli classifieds portal Yad2's -- to dismantle structures enabling apartheid and occupation, and silence from German authorities isn't neutrality, it's complicity, according to Grabosch 

ISTANBUL

In an interview with Anadolu's Strategic Analysis Department, lawyer Robert Grabosch assessed the illegal land grabs and settlement sales of Israel in West Bank, as well as the complaint against Axel Springer, the owner of the Israeli classifieds portal Yad2.

Grabosch is a German lawyer representing Palestinians in a complaint against illegal land and settlement sales in West Bank.

Question: Hello Mr. Grabosch, you represent a group of Palestinians from the West Bank who filed a complaint in Germany against Axel Springer, alleging the company promotes illegal Israeli settlements by listing properties in occupied territories. Could you briefly explain who builds these settlements, their methods, and how they justify their expansion?

Grabosch: Indeed, I am one of more than 10 lawyers from Germany, Israel, and Palestine that support this complaint filed by Palestinian individuals and three villages in the West Bank. The complaint explains that the German media group Springer through a subsidiary, operates the online platform, on which settlers find land that is owned by Palestinians. The settlement movement in the West Bank started half a century ago, with Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territory in 1967. The settlements are residential communities built by Israeli settlers on land that international law recognizes as Palestinian territory, illegally occupied Palestinian territory.

Settlements are primarily established by Israeli settlers, often supported by the Israeli government through subsidies, infrastructure development, and military protection. There are also private organizations, including foreign donors, that fund settlement activities. Sometimes, settlers act independently by creating so-called "outposts," which even Israeli law initially deems illegal but they are often later legalized retroactively. Land is often confiscated under pretexts like "security needs."

Complex legal frameworks are used to justify land acquisition and settlement expansion. The justification for settlements often draws on ideological or religious claims. Many settlers believe they have a divine or historical right to the land based on biblical texts. Others frame settlements as necessary for Israel's security or as part of a broader nationalist project. All these narratives ignore the rights of Palestinians who have lived on this land for generations.  

Question: Are Palestinians coerced or forced out of their land, or do they voluntarily sell or leave it? What are the mechanisms behind land confiscation or acquisition?

Grabosch: The overwhelming evidence shows that Palestinians are not leaving their land voluntarily. Instead, they are being systematically coerced and forced out through a combination of legal maneuvers, physical violence, and administrative restrictions. There are several mechanisms of coercion and forced displacement:

For instance, Israeli authorities declare land "military zones" or "nature reserves" to justify its confiscation and then give it to settlers. Authorities also confiscate land under the guise of "security needs" or for the construction of infrastructure such as roads that are exclusively for settlers.

Settlers also frequently engage in intimidation, destruction of property, and physical violence against Palestinians. Israeli authorities rarely prosecute these assaults. Furthermore, there are restrictive Administrative Policies for Palestinians living in Area C of the West Bank, which is under full Israeli control, it is nearly impossible, to obtain building permits. And when they build without permits, their constructions are often demolished by Israeli authorities.

In addition, access to agricultural land is frequently denied or restricted by settlers or the military. Settlers also destroy crops --especially olive trees -- which are also vital to Palestinian cultural heritage.

And then there are movement restrictions. Checkpoints, roadblocks, and settler-only roads fragment Palestinian communities and prevent access to farmland, schools, hospitals, and workplaces. This isolation contributes to economic hardship and forces many families to relocate.  

Question: There is a historical claim regarding this issue that Palestinians willingly sell their land and that Israelis are acquiring the country through these purchases. Is there any truth to this?

Grabosch: Well, the claim that anyone "willingly sold" their land -- in the past or today -- would dramatically oversimplify this complex reality which is shaped by colonial frameworks, economic exploitation, and systemic violence. Today, acquisitions in the West Bank are entrenched in illegal occupation.

The 4th Geneva Convention (Article 49) prohibits any occupying power transferring civilians into the occupied territory. A Jordanian law from 1953 also prohibits any sales of land in the West Jordan territory to non-Arabs. Now, just in January, Israel advanced a bill to repeal that restriction from the Jordanian-era, and this is now escalating "questionable deals and forgeries."

But the laws of an occupying power cannot legalize the taking of land by that occupying power. And the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its Advisory Opinion of 2024 reaffirmed settlements as illegal. So, what we see in the West Bank is certainly not a natural process of voluntary migration but a systematic policy of dispossession that violates international law.  

Question: How many settlements exist in the West Bank, and how many people live in them?

Grabosch: From 1967 through 2017 over 200 settlements were established in the West Bank according to the Israeli NGO B'Tselem. And since then, the number went up sharply, now approaching 300. More than 700,000 settlers live there now, 1/3 of them in East Jerusalem, according to the Organization Peace Now and the United Nations.

This settlement network makes a Palestinian state increasingly difficult to achieve. It has been widely criticized as a violation of international law, particularly Article 49(6) of the 4th Geneva Convention. So, this settlement expansion is more than a demographic or geographic issue; it undermines Palestinian rights to self-determination and exacerbates tensions in the region.  

Question: Who exactly has filed the complaint and which violations do they say they experience?

Grabosch: The complainants in our case are five individual farmers whose land has been taken violently from them and their families; three villages of Iskaka, Marda, and Taybeh. They are in the Salfit and Ramallah Governorates. Their population is between 1,500 and 2,300 residents each. The rights to land, to property, and the right to water are being violated.  

Question: There is a curiosity in Turkish public opinion about the specifics of land sales in the West Bank. Who exactly is selling land, and who is buying it?

Grabosch: Transfer is usually processed indirectly through settlement developer companies. Individual settlers, on the other hand, re-sell property, after taking it or inheriting it. To a lesser extent, the Israeli Land Authority lists "state land" that had been confiscated. Right-wing NGOs also play a role, they litigate to evict Palestinians, then list “vacant” land on Yad2. These properties are made exclusively available to Jewish settlers only. Listings for the Ariel settlement include clauses that exclude non-Jews. Many settlements have Admission Committees that screen buyers for their religion. Many listings say "ideal for Zionist pioneers" or they use Hebrew terms like Judea and Samaria to appeal to nationalists.  

Question: How is Axel Springer involved in all of this? What connects the company to illegal settlement expansion, and why is it a party to this case?

Grabosch: As the complaint explains, the Axel Springer group owns an Israeli subsidiary that operates the listings site Yad2 -- which is Hebrew for “Second Hand.” On that site, Jewish settlers find the land that was taken from Palestinians. So, we argue that the German head company must take reasonable measures to avoid illegal property listings, which are part of the land rights violations.  

Question: What kind of company is "Axel Springer SE" and what does it do?

Grabosch: Axel Springer S.E. is one of Europe's largest media corporations. It's headquartered in Berlin, Germany, and it operates two main business segments. First, it is the most influential media company in Germany. Springer publishes major newspapers such as BILD and DIE WELT and it operates various TV channels and online news platforms.

The 2nd segment of Axel Springer's business is its classifieds division, which includes online platforms for job searches, real estate listings, and other services. This division operates globally and generates substantial revenue for the company. 

Question: Is Yad2 part of the classifieds business?

Grabosch: Exactly. The online platform Yad2 is operated by an Israeli company, Coral Tell Ltd. According to the public company registries in Germany and Israel, this is a subsidiary of the Axel Springer group. In the group structure, there are four intermediary companies, and eventually, as the complaint explains, Coral Tell Ltd. is wholly owned by Axel Springer SE.  

Question: And Axel Springer SE -- the German parent company -- knows about Yad2?

Grabosch: Springer certainly knows about it. And our international research team even established that the German Springer company even controls the Yad2 business, according to public reports and excerpts from company registries. The German Springer company owns 100% of the shares of the subsidiaries. Policies and reports of the parent company explicitly cover the subsidiary’s business, too. So, there are more than enough reasons for the supervisory authority BAFA (Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control) to investigate the case.  

Question: What is the legal basis for this complaint under German law?

Grabosch: The legal basis for this complaint is Germany's Corporate Due Diligence Act, which came into force in January 2023. This law requires large German companies to identify and mitigate human rights and environmental risks in their global operations.

In this case, Axel Springer SE is accused of failing to fulfill its due diligence obligations concerning its Israeli subsidiary Coral Tell Ltd., which operates the Yad2 platform. The complaint argues that Yad2 violates land rights of Palestinians in the West Bank by listing property for sale that is located on land illegally confiscated from Palestinians. These transactions perpetuate the forced evictions and land grabs that have already taken place, and the operation of this platform encourages further land grabbing and settlements. Axel Springer SE was made aware of these issues through an investigative report published by Hanno Hauenstein in The Intercept 1 year ago. This had stirred public criticism. But Springer chose not to act. Instead, it claimed compliance with Israeli law, ignoring its broader responsibilities under German and international law.  

Question: Does the Corporate Due Diligence Act apply to Springer's operations in the Middle East?

Grabosch: It does. Without a doubt. The German DD law explicitly provides that the business operations of a company's subsidiary are part of the company's own business operations, if the company controls that subsidiary.  

Question: What role does international law play here?

Grabosch: International law is the bedrock of this case. The settlement enterprise in the West Bank violates foundational principles of international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights law, which bind all states -- including Germany and corporations like Axel Springer SE.

1. 4th Geneva Convention (1949):

• Article 49(6) explicitly prohibits an occupying power from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory.

2. ICJ Advisory Opinions and UN Resolutions

• 2024 Advisory Opinion: The court ordered Israel to end its occupation "as rapidly as possible," dismantle settlements, and compensate Palestinians for damages. Critically, it also held that third states must cease all aid or assistance perpetuating the occupation, including corporate complicity.
• UN Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016): Condemned settlements as a "flagrant violation" of international law and demanded states distinguish between Israel and occupied territories in economic dealings.

3. Corporate Accountability Under International Law:

• The Rome Statute classifies transferring civilians into occupied territory as a war crime (Article 8(2)(b)(viii)). While Israel isn't a party to the statute, corporations aiding such acts risk complicity. The ICJ’s 2024 opinion emphasized that states must ensure businesses under their jurisdiction do not enable violations -- a duty Germany enshrined in its Due Diligence Act.

In essence, international law doesn't exist in a vacuum. It demands concrete action -- like halting Yad2's listings -- to dismantle structures enabling apartheid and occupation. Silence from German authorities isn’t neutrality; it’s complicity.

Question: What are the obligations of Germany as a UN member state in this case?

Grabosch: Germany is a UN member state and signatory to the 4th Geneva Convention. It has clear obligations under international law to prevent and address violations stemming from Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories.

The German government must enforce International Humanitarian Law, which is, in this case, the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 1 of the Convention requires all states to “ensure respect” for its provisions, including the prohibition on transferring civilians into occupied territory (Article 49(6)). The ICJ reinforced this in its 2024 Advisory Opinion, explicitly stating that all states must ensure that their corporations do not contribute to such violations in the West Bank. By letting Axel Springer's subsidiary Yad2 facilitate settlement expansion, the German government violates these obligations.

In short, Germany cannot claim to uphold a "rules-based international order" while allowing its corporations to undermine those very rules. Legal consistency is not optional -- it’s a binding obligation.

Question: What do the complainants expect Axel Springer SE to do?

Grabosch: The complainants demand immediate action from Axel Springer SE to halt its subsidiary Yad2's role in enabling illegal settlements. Specifically:

Yad2 must delist all properties in occupied Palestinian territories unless sellers provide verifiable proof of lawful ownership --something Palestinians are systematically denied in Area C due to discriminatory Israeli policies. Implement geofencing technology to block listings in settlements and adopt independent audits to verify land ownership. Axel Springer must publicly disclose these measures to ensure transparency, establish complaints mechanism for victims that actually works so that illegal listings are suspended without delay.

Question: Could successful enforcement of this complaint lead to settlements being removed or restricted?

Grabosch: Enforcing the law would at least make that expelling Palestinians from their homes and lands not very appealing anymore. If you cannot sell or buy real estate online, it is much more difficult to transfer the property and hence, the taking of the land would slow down a lot.

Every time a listing for stolen land is placed online and every time that land is transferred, the property rights are violated anew. Settlements would not be removed as a result, but their expansion would slow down and further land-rights violations would be stopped. Also, German political leaders -- including the Green Party-led Economics Ministry, and the Chancellery led by the Social Democrats' Olaf Scholz remain conspicuously silent.

Although the ICJ has confirmed settlements violate international law and human rights continue to be systematically violated..

Question: So, it seems that BAFA is not taking the case seriously? Why is that so?

Grabosch: Well, BAFA is controlled by the Federal Ministries of Economics and of Labor, so eventually politicians from the Green Party and Social Democrats decide. And there is a widespread fear of Springer. Politicians' careers depend on the Springer media's good will. It dominates the German media landscape. So it takes some bravery to uphold the law. Eventually, this silence undermines Germany's credibility as a defender of international law and human rights.

Question: Did you expect this when you took on this case?

Grabosch: Not to this extent. You know, the German government has long been explicitly against the settlements in the West Bank. For many years, the German government has called for a 2-state solution. Olaf Scholz said in an interview in November that the settlements and the settler violence have to stop.

Furthermore, in November, Germany voted in favor of a UN resolution that upholds Palestinians' sovereign rights over their territory and natural resources. So I had thought that they cannot dismiss this Complaint. Dismissing this case would expose blatant hypocrisy. If BAFA and the politicians in charge and their entire parties remain silent, they lose all credibility. They cannot do that. But so far it seems that I was wrong and meanwhile, the violations currently intensify.

Question: What motivated you to take on this case, despite the risks?

Grabosch: I believe in the power of international law to replace conflict with peace. Accountability and trust in the rule of law are essential for ending war and establishing justice. Legally, it’s clear that Axel Springer SE must not contribute to settlers' illegal land grabs, as this violates international, German, and even Jordanian law.

Our team includes Palestinian, Israeli, and German lawyers who share the same view: Stopping corporate contributions to these crimes is the only non-violent way to achieve a just and sustainable solution. As a lawyer, I believe legal tools are the most effective means for achieving peace. Dialogue at equal footing would be ideal, but until that becomes possible, we must uphold the law. And as Germans, we have a particular responsibility. Our History has understandably made it necessary for the Jewish people to establish a safe space. We must not ignore the current crisis in the West Bank, it endangers all lives there including Jewish lives. Essentially, I decided to work on this case because I believe Germany must uphold human rights for all people, and without fear or favor.

Question: What would you say to German political leaders who have remained silent on this issue despite their stated opposition to settlements?

Grabosch: My message? Demand and ensure that BAFA applies the law! The Due Diligence Act and international principles, like the protection of property, are clear. Ignoring this case undermines Germany's credibility as a defender of human rights and international law.

And don't think that this is a religious conflict. There are Jewish people, Christians, and Muslim Palestinians living in the West Bank. And not all settlers are Jewish -- some are Christian Zionists or secular individuals. Aiding and abetting land grabs and forced displacement puts everyone in the region at greater risk.

German leaders should recognize that only by respecting human rights on all sides can we create a foundation for peace. Silence in the face of injustice is complicity, and it is time for Germany to uphold its stated opposition to settlements with action, not just words.

* The Axel Springer media group left Anadolu's questions regarding the validity of the allegations in the complaint unanswered, while, according to information obtained after the interview, the complaint in question was rejected by BAFA.