Until 2019, the German foreign office supported an aid organization with close ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood without knowing how the funds were actually being used.
This information appears in a newly released confidential audit by Germany’s Federal Court of Auditors, which the Institute for Secular Law (Institut für Weltanschauungsrecht or IFW) has been trying to obtain for five years.
Until now, unsuccessfully.
The audit concerns state funding for the organization Islamic Relief, purported to have ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.
The now-public documents reveal, according to ifw advisory board member Seyran Ateş, “a shocking naivety on the part of the Foreign Office.”
Islamic Relief Germany (IRD) had long been regarded in Germany as a respected Muslim charity organization. Several consecutive German governments, including former chancellor Angela Merkel’s second, third, and fourth cabinets, provided IRD with millions of euros in funding.
IRD was a member of the German aid alliance Aktion Deutschland Hilft, and gained prominent supporters for its “Meals for Orphans” campaign, including former President Christian Wulff and his successor Frank-Walter Steinmeier.
Foreign Office funded Islamic Relief largely 'blindly'
On April 15, 2019, the German government noted that both Islamic Relief Germany and its parent organization, Islamic Relief Worldwide, had “significant personnel connections to the Muslim Brotherhood or organizations close to it.”
The government also admitted that since 2014 it had known that “Islamic Relief Worldwide,” including its German branch IRD, was banned in Israel, regarded as “part of the financial system of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood movement,” and therefore classified as a “terrorist organization.”
It is worth noting that the IRW is also banned in the UAE, due to its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
The German government refused to provide detailed information on how public funds given to Islamic Relief had been used, instead referring to an ongoing audit by the Federal Court of Auditors.
The audit report was nevertheless classified as confidential.
Seyran Ateş, an IFW advisory board member, requested access to the findings under Germany’s Freedom of Information Act (IFG) in 2021, but the request and the appeal were denied.
With support from IFW and its supporting organization, the Giordano Bruno Foundation, Ateş then filed suit against the Federal Court of Auditors and the Foreign Office.
According to IFW, the Foreign Office argued before the Berlin Administrative Court that publication of the report could lead to public controversy and polemical escalation; the IFW, however, insisted that citizens have the right to know how their tax money is being used.
Ateş ultimately prevailed in two oral hearings before the Berlin Administrative Court. A special senate of the Federal Administrative Court then examined the full audit report to determine which passages contained protected intelligence material that could legally be redacted.
After the Federal Administrative Court’s ruling on September 10, 2025, Ateş and the Federal Court of Auditors, along with the Foreign Office, reached a settlement.
The two-part audit report is now publicly available.
Part 1 examines whether Islamic Relief Germany was even suitable to receive public funding. Part 2 examines whether the Foreign Office fulfilled its duty to ensure the proper use of those funds.
In both cases, the Federal Court of Auditors reached negative conclusions.
Regarding Islamic Relief’s ties to Islamist actors, the auditors concluded in Part 1 that “The Foreign Office cannot explain the basis on which it concluded that Islamic Relief had a good reputation as a humanitarian NGO. In January 2009, it categorically rejected cooperation with IR. Why the Foreign Office later deviated from this clear and binding directive is incomprehensible.”
Additionally, “According to letters from the Interior Ministry, dated March 4, 2004, and February 6, 2017, federal ministries are required, in line with the strategy of a comprehensive fight against terrorist organizations, to refrain from funding organizations against which constitutionally relevant security findings exist. We therefore advised the Foreign Office to discontinue funding IRD.”
The second part of the audit concludes that the Foreign Office funded IR largely “blindly,” often without reliable proof regarding how the money was being used.
A shocking naivety by the state in dealing with political Islam
In some cases, the Foreign Office did not even know that funding provided to Islamic Relief Germany had been forwarded directly to Islamic Relief Worldwide or Islamic Relief Turkey.
“According to the audit report, €240,000 was transported in cash-filled suitcases by plane from Germany to Turkey,” Ateş said. “While this may sometimes be practical in crisis regions, in the case of organizations connected to extremist groups, this is grossly negligent.”
The unredacted sections of the report contain no direct evidence that Foreign Office funds were actually transferred to the Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas or used to finance terrorist attacks.
However, Ateş argued that “given the documented ‘blind-flight funding’ by the Foreign Office, this is unfortunately entirely possible.”
“The remarkably critical audit report documents a shocking naivety by the state in dealing with political Islam,” Ateş continued.