NPA’s 2018 U.S. settlement and our work in Palestine

The 2018 settlement with U.S. authorities

In 2018, Norwegian People’s Aid reached a settlement with the United States Department of Justice related to a civil case brought under the U.S. False Claims Act. The case involved claims that activities in two NPA country programmes violated US law and that NPA’s certifications were false.

The settlement amounted to USD 2 million and resolved the case without any finding or admission of guilt, fraud, or support for terrorism.

Projects referenced in the 2018 U.S. settlement

The settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice referred to activities in two country programmes – Iran and Gaza – that were assessed by U.S. authorities to be inconsistent with USAID’s Anti-Terrorism Certification. These activities were not funded by USAID.

Mine clearance in Iran

From 2001 to 2008, NPA entered into a series of contracts with Norsk Hydro, a Norwegian, partly state-owned energy company, to provide technical expertise for seismic surveys and drilling in Iran's Anaran Exploration Block. Under these contracts, NPA personnel carried out risk assessments, technical survey of suspected hazardous areas, removal and clearance of explosive objects found along planned seismic lines, inspection and clearance of equipment assembly and drilling test sites, and Mine Risk Education (MRE) training for Hydro staff to ensure HSE requirements were met.

The activities referenced in the U.S. case related to NPA’s engagement with Iranian governmental entities during this period. At the time, NPA assessed these activities to be permissible under Norwegian law and not subject to U.S. sanctions, and they were not funded by USAID.

U.S. authorities later took the position that these engagements were inconsistent with the scope of the Anti-Terrorism Certification signed in connection with separate USAID-funded grants. NPA disputed this interpretation but acknowledged, as part of the settlement, that its conduct did not align with USAID’s interpretation of the certification.

Humanitarian assistance and protection of civilians in Gaza

The settlement also referenced activities carried out by NPA in Gaza through local civil society partners. These activities focused on humanitarian assistance and civilian protection and were funded by donors other than USAID.

The U.S. government asserted that certain partner relationships in Gaza fell within the scope of the Anti-Terrorism Certification associated with USAID grants, despite the fact that the activities in question were not USAID-funded.

NPA’s position was that the certification applied only to projects financed by U.S. funds. This interpretation was not accepted by U.S. authorities, and the disagreement formed part of the basis for the civil settlement.

No findings were made that NPA funds were knowingly used to support terrorist activity.

Allegations of terrorist-support

NPA was not found guilty of supporting terrorism. The settlement was a resolution to a civil case, not a criminal conviction, and did not include any admission of wrongdoing.

As part of the settlement, NPA acknowledged that certifications to USAID were rendered false by NPA’s participation in the oil development project in Iran, and that some of the “Youth of Today . . . Leaders of Tomorrow” training programs and workshops in Gaza were conducted in a manner that was inconsistent with NPA’s Certifications to USAID, in that they were attended by representatives of entities that were prohibited parties under U.S. law, including entities that appeared on the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) list.

NPA acknowledged that the activities were inconsistent with the certification, but that it was motivated by an interpretation of the clause to only apply to US-funded activities; whereas the activities referenced in the case were funded by other donors.

There was no admittance of terrorist support, funding, or intent from NPA’s side, and no court ruling established terrorist support.

The essence of the False Claims Act case

The case stemmed from how NPA – in line with several other international NGOs at the time – interpreted USAID’s Anti-Terrorism Certification. NPA understood the certification to apply to activities funded by U.S. government money, not to projects funded by other donors.

The activities referenced in the case were not funded by USAID and did not violate Norwegian law. However, the U.S. government applied a broader interpretation of the certification.

Faced with prolonged litigation, significant financial risk, and uncertainty in a legal framework not previously tested against NGOs, NPA chose to settle.

Why NPA chose to settle

The decision to settle was based on a careful assessment of legal, financial, and humanitarian considerations. A full trial would likely have taken years and incurred substantial legal costs. Prolonged litigation could have jeopardised NPA’s ability to deliver humanitarian assistance.

Importantly, a settlement allowed NPA to continue life-saving humanitarian and mine-clearance work without interruption.

Lawfare and repeated allegations against civil society

The case against NPA was one of several similar lawsuits filed against humanitarian and development organisations using the False Claims Act. These cases have been widely recognised within the international NGO community as part of broader “lawfare” efforts intended to deter organisations from working with Palestinians.

Comparable claims have targeted organisations such as The Carter Center, Oxfam, Christian Aid, and the American University of Beirut. Several organisations have publicly criticised these tactics as attempts to silence legitimate humanitarian and human rights work.

NPA’s partners in Palestine and Israeli terror designations

In October 2021, the Israeli Ministry of Defense designated six Palestinian civil society organisations as terrorist entities, including one of NPA’s partners at the time.

These designations were met with criticism from several European governments, with nine EU member states stating they would continue working with the Palestinian civil society groups because Israel had not provided evidence to justify the terrorist label.

NPA continues to work openly and transparently with Palestinian partners in compliance with applicable laws, and based on rigorous due diligence, financial controls, and ongoing risk assessments.

• No U.S. authority has confirmed Israel’s designations
• European governments have publicly questioned the evidence behind them
• NPA’s partnerships are grounded in development, humanitarian need, and international law

How NPA ensures compliance and accountability

NPA applies strict compliance procedures across all programmes, including:

• Comprehensive partner vetting and monitoring
• Compliance with U.S. sanctions where applicable (e.g. use of U.S. dollars or U.S.-funded projects)
• Independent audits and donor reporting

NPA's work in Palestine today

NPA’s work in Palestine focuses on humanitarian assistance, food security, protection, and civilian safety in one of the world’s most protracted crises. Our response prioritises locally led response, international humanitarian standards, and the protection of civilians.

Since the settlement in 2018, NPA has experienced recurrent allegations and misinformation about our activities. These do not affect our commitment to addressing the massive humanitarian needs on the ground responsibly and lawfully.

Further reading