On 8 April 2026, ELSC, Al-Haq, SOMO, and The Rights Forum co-filed a complaint with the Dutch Court of Appeal, challenging the length of time it takes the public prosecutor to reach a decision on a criminal complaint against Booking.com that accuses the company of laundering profits from listings in illegal Israeli settlements. The coalition of civil society organisations has initiated a so-called ‘Article 12’ procedure under Dutch law, which requires the Court of Appeal to decide on the merits of the criminal complaint, and whether the prosecutor must proceed to prosecute Booking.com.
The original criminal complaint filed by the civil society organisations on 8 November 2023 accuses Booking.com of laundering revenue obtained from renting out properties in illegal Israeli settlements across the occupied West Bank, including East-Jerusalem. The settlements are established through the commission of war crimes, including Israel’s transfer of its own population into the occupied Palestinian territory. Therefore, the coalition of civil society organisations argues that Booking.com obtains profits from war crimes, which then pass through the Dutch financial system, in violation of Dutch anti-money laundering legislation.
During the time the complaint has been under review by the prosecutor, Israel has continued to increase and expand illegal settlements across Palestinian territory, leading to widespread forced displacement of Palestinians from their towns and villages. Settler attacks against Palestinians across the West Bank continue to increase in severity; UN figures show a 54% increase in injuries and a fourfold rise in displacement compared to 2025. The case could set an important precedent for corporate accountability regarding business activities linked to war crimes. Furthermore, research by the organisations shows that in the first year following the filing of the complaint, Booking.com sharply increased its listings in illegal settlements in East Jerusalem.
We recognise that the thorough examination of evidence and legal arguments in a criminal complaint requires time. Mindful of this, the co-filers have waited until now for the preliminary examination of the complaint to conclude, and in that time, have made two additional filings to support that process. However, our organisations have now concluded that a reasonable timeframe for a decision on the complaint has been well exceeded.
Al-Haq’s General Director, Shawan Jabarin, said:
“The Palestinian people are facing escalating erasure under Israel’s genocidal settler-colonial apartheid regime. At the same time, corporations not only profit from these international crimes but actively sustain illegal settlements and an unlawful occupation. With Palestinian land being illegally appropriated at an unprecedented rate, human rights violations intensifying, and settlements growing at an alarming pace, any further delay in accountability risks allowing this erasure to go unchecked. Urgent action is imperative.”
Willem Jebbink, the criminal lawyer who filed the complaint on behalf of the coalition, said:
“While cases involving war crimes are generally complex, we believe that this particular case — concerning the profiting from war crimes — is comparatively straightforward to prove. I have never seen the Public Prosecution Service take approximately two and a half years to investigate a complaint without reaching any conclusion. My clients consider a criminal investigation to be urgently necessary, as war crimes continue to be committed in the West Bank.”
If the complaint filed today is found admissible, the Court of Appeal can decide that further investigation is needed before it issues an order, or it can decide that the prosecutor must proceed to prosecute Booking.com based on the criminal complaint.