UN adds 61 firms to list linked to illegal Israeli settlements

The United Nations human‑rights office added 61 companies to its database of firms linked to illegal Israeli settlement activity on Friday, bringing the total to 214 businesses operating in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. The update follows an 18‑page UN report that details why each firm was included and notes that five companies listed last year were removed.

The expansion comes as international scrutiny of Israel’s settlement program intensifies. In July, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion declaring the settlements unlawful and urging Israel to halt new construction and withdraw from occupied territory. The ruling, while not binding, has sharpened pressure on companies that profit from settlement infrastructure. The UN’s database is part of a broader effort to identify corporate actors that may be complicit in human‑rights abuses in the region, especially as the conflict in Gaza enters its third year.

The new entries raise the tally to 214 firms from 11 countries, most of them Israeli. Others are based in China, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, South Africa, Spain, the United States and the United Kingdom. Companies are listed if they engage in at least one of ten prohibited activities, such as building or expanding settlements, supplying surveillance gear, providing banking services, or delivering utilities. The UN says the standard of proof requires “reasonable grounds” that a firm contributes to adverse human‑rights impacts, a lower bar than criminal courts. After the assessment, the UN contacts each firm and gives it 60 days to submit additional information. Fourteen companies have responded so far, though it is unclear how many of the 126 firms reviewed were actually reached. Notable additions include Spanish logistics firm Salvat Logistica and Israeli real‑estate holder Alony Hetz, joining previously listed names like Expedia, TripAdvisor, Airbnb and Motorola.

The UN says the database will be updated regularly and shared with member states, investors and civil‑society groups. Critics argue the list could pressure firms to cut ties with settlement projects, while supporters warn that without concrete sanctions the measure may have limited impact. As the ICJ opinion fuels diplomatic debate, the expanded list underscores growing calls for corporate accountability in the occupied territories.