Facts
Lafarge owned and ran a cement factory in Jalabiya, Syria. From 2012 on, several armed groups operated in the factory’s vicinity. The company allegedly entered into negotiations with ISIS to purchase oil and pozzolan (a material used to make concrete) from them, as well as to obtain official ISIS passes for crossing checkpoints in order to maintain its production in the area. Testimonies also point to Lafarge risking the lives of its employees, who suffered kidnappings and extortion, and violating a number of basic labor rights. The company allegedly worked out “arrangements” with armed groups, including ISIS and Jabhat Al-Nusra, around the factory from 2012-2015 amounting to at least EUR 13 000 000, according to the judicial inquiry.
Procedure
In September 2016, the French minister of finance filed a complaint before the Paris prosecutor against LafargeHolcim for its alleged illegal purchase of oil in Syria, despite the EU embargo issued in 2012. The Paris prosecutor opened an investigation in October 2016.
On 15 November 2016, 11 Syrian former Lafarge employees and the human rights groups Sherpa and the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) filed a criminal complaint as civil parties in Paris against Lafarge, Lafarge Cement Syria and their current and former top executives for the financing of terrorism, complicity in crimes against humanity committed in Syria, endangerment of people’s lives and for a series of labor rights violations.
On 9 June 2017, three investigative judges of the Paris Tribunal opened an investigation into the crimes alleged by the plaintiffs. In September 2017, three of the victims were heard by one of the investigative judges.
Between December 2017 and May 2018, eight former executives, including former CEOs of the Holcim group, were charged while under investigation (mis en examen) with financing terrorism and endangerment of people’s lives amongst other charges, and were requested to provide the courts with a deposit of several million euros. In September 2019, a Syrian-Canadian alleged former intermediary between the company and ISIS suppliers was also charged.
On 28 June 2018, three investigative judges of the Paris Tribunal charged while under investigation (mis en examen) the legal entity Lafarge SA (now Holcim) with complicity in crimes against humanity, financing a terrorist enterprise, endangerment of people’s lives and violation of an embargo. The investigative judges ordered the company to hand over EUR 30 000 000 to the judicial authorities as a security deposit ahead of a possible trial.
On 24 October 2019, the Investigation Chamber of the Paris Court of Appeal (Cour d’appel) rejected the admissibility of Sherpa and the ECCHR as civil parties.
On 7 November 2019, the Court of Appeal confirmed the indictments of the Lafarge executives and of the Lafarge company itself for financing a terrorist enterprise, endangerment of people’s lives and violation of an EU embargo. However, it dismissed the charges of complicity in crimes against humanity for the company arguing that the money transfers had an economic purpose and were not driven by an intention to participate in crimes against humanity.
In November 2019, Sherpa and the ECCHR appealed the rejection of their civil party applications and the dismissal of the complicity in crimes against humanity charges to the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation). Defense lawyers also appealed the 7 November confirmation of indictments.
On 7 September 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that Lafarge’s indictment for complicity in crimes against humanity was wrongly dismissed by the Paris Court of Appeal, finding that knowingly transferring millions of dollars to a terrorist organization with knowledge of its criminal nature was sufficient to establish the moral element for complicity in crimes against humanity, without the necessity to establish whether Lafarge was driven by an intent to commit crimes against humanity. The court also ruled that Lafarge’s indictment for endangerment of peoples’ lives was wrongly confirmed by the Paris Court of Appeal, finding that it had not sufficiently justified the application of French law to the case of Syrian workers. The Supreme Court therefore referred the case back to the Paris Court of Appeal for a new decision on both charges. In addition, it confirmed Sherpa’s inadmissibility as a civil party on all charges and ECCHR’s inadmissibility for all charges except the complicity in crimes against humanity charge.
The Supreme Court sent the legal challenges against the various indictments back to a newly composed Court of Appeal.
On 18 May 2022, the Paris Court of Appeal upheld all charges against the parent company Lafarge. In confirming the charge of complicity in crimes against humanity, the Court of Appeal reiterated the legal findings of the Supreme Court that there was serious or corroborating evidence that Lafarge knowingly chose to maintain its activities in the region by financing armed and terrorist groups. With regard to the charge of deliberately endangering the lives of its subsidiary’s employees in Syria, the Court of Appeal further found that French law was applicable under private international law, as there was a closer connection between the workers and the French parent company. The Court relied on the permanent interference of Lafarge in the management of its subsidiary in Syria, as had been highlighted by the Supreme Court. The Court thus found that there was serious or corroborating evidence that Lafarge may have been complicit in crimes against humanity and may have endangered the lives of its Syrian workers and upheld both charges.
On 18 October 2022, in a separate proceeding in the United States, Lafarge SA and Lafarge Cement Syria pleaded guilty before a federal court to conspiring to provide material support to foreign terrorist organizations and agreed to pay USD 778 000 000 in fines and forfeiture. It is the first time that a company was prosecuted in the US on this charge. The media reported that in court, the Lafarge chair said the former company executives knowingly and willfully agreed to participate in a conspiracy to make and authorize payments intended for the benefit of various armed groups in Syria. The plea agreement is distinct from the French criminal proceedings and does not address the central question of corporate complicity in international crimes and reparations for those affected.
In 2023, Lafarge filed another appeal to the Supreme Court against the 18 May 2022 decision of the Court of Appeal which had upheld all charges against the company. Central to Lafarge’s claim was that the Supreme Court needed to decide whether the Court of Appeal was right in ruling that French law governs the employment relationship between the multinational Lafarge and its Syrian subsidiary’s workers, in order to uphold the charge of deliberate endangerment of the Syrian workers’ lives.
As a result, on 14 March 2023, the Supreme Court’s criminal chamber, assigned to the case, requested the formal opinion of the Supreme Court’s social rights chamber on the question of whether French labor laws on employee’s safety are overriding mandatory provisions providing protections that are of public interest and thus cannot be derogated. On 4 July 2023, the social chamber issued its opinion that rules about security obligations for the employer are not “overriding mandatory provisions” – which would apply in all instances. The social chamber concluded that these rules cannot justify alone the application of French law to the working relationship between the subsidiary Syrian workers and Lafarge. The human rights organizations, plaintiffs in this case, including ECCHR, Sherpa and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), along with former Lafarge employees’ plaintiffs in this case, argued that regardless of the qualification of these rules as overriding mandatory provisions, French law should apply to the employment relationship based on the criteria of a closer connection derived from private international law regulations.
The criminal chamber of the Supreme Court held its subsequent hearing on 18 September 2023. In an exceptional turn, instead of issuing its awaited decision, the Supreme Court, on 3 October 2023, ordered the reopening of the debates regarding a potential decision to cancel the charge of endangering the lives of its Syrian employees without referring the case back to the lower court.
On 16 January 2024, the Supreme Court made its final decision and confirmed the Lafarge company’s indictment for complicity in crimes against humanity while dismissing the charge of endangerment of workers’ lives.
On 16 October 2024, French investigating judges ordered Lafarge SA and eight individuals to stand trial before a French criminal court for financing a terrorist organization and violating an embargo. The defendants include the company in its legal entity, four former top executives of the parent and its subsidiary, two former staff members of the subsidiary and two former intermediaries, including a Syrian businessman. No appeal has been filed against the order to stand trial. The trial is scheduled to take place from 4 November to 9 December 2025.
The judicial investigation on the company’s complicity in crimes against humanity continues.
Highlight
France leads the way in the domain as shown by the amendment of its law in 2004 which allows the prosecution of companies for all crimes entailed in its Criminal Code (including core crimes such as crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide) – committed in France as well as abroad.