Full Analysis Summary
Al-Majd Europe allegations
Allegations have emerged that a shadowy organisation called Al-Majd Europe was used to move Palestinians out of Gaza under circumstances activists and some officials describe as suspicious or coercive.
Middle East Eye reports activists say Al-Majd Europe moved Palestinians out of Gaza in what they call a new form of ethnic cleansing since October 2023, framing the movements as potentially forced displacement.
Al-Jazeera Net summarises investigations that exposed Al-Majd Europe organising charter flights moving Palestinians out of Gaza to destinations including South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia, raising suspicions of human trafficking and illicit activity despite the group's humanitarian claims.
Al Jazeera documents fact-checking and operational links, noting an earlier unannounced flight carrying more than 170 Palestinians to South Africa on Oct. 28 and that organisers said some movements had prior coordination with the Israeli army and were routine.
These combined accounts show activists, regional outlets and independent checks raising alarm about Al-Majd Europe's role and the circumstances of large charter movements out of Gaza.
Coverage Differences
Tone and framing
Sources diverge in how strongly they characterise the movements: Middle East Eye (Western Alternative) quotes activists who call the actions "a new form of ethnic cleansing," Al-Jazeera Net (West Asian) highlights "suspicions of human trafficking and illicit activity despite the group's humanitarian claims," while Al Jazeera (West Asian) focuses more on verifying operational details and previous flights and reports organisers saying movements "had prior coordination with the Israeli army and was routine." Each source either foregrounds activist allegations, investigative concerns about trafficking, or operational claims of coordination.
Controversial evacuation flight
A specific flight that intensified scrutiny arrived in Johannesburg carrying 153 Palestinians and was reportedly held on the tarmac for about 12 hours, according to Middle East Eye.
Middle East Eye said passengers were initially not allowed to disembark, prompting confusion and anger.
Authorities and activists uncovered irregularities: the government said it had not been informed of the arrival, many evacuees had no paperwork, and some passengers said they did not know where they were going.
Al-Jazeera Net reports passengers said they were transferred from Gaza to Israel before departure and had applied online and paid fees, with reports citing amounts of about $2,000 or $5,000.
Al Jazeera notes officials described the group flying from Ramon Airport on a Romanian aircraft, transiting Nairobi, and landing in Johannesburg after security screening and paying fees.
These accounts together document operational irregularities, questions about documentation and money, and discrepancies about who authorised and coordinated the departures.
Coverage Differences
Details about passenger experience and payments
Middle East Eye emphasises disembarkation delays and lack of government notification and paperwork, portraying confusion and possible coercion. Al-Jazeera Net specifically reports passengers "had applied online and paid fees" (amounts reported), and Al Jazeera details the flight route and that passengers underwent "security screening and paying fees." Thus, some sources stress administrative irregularities and activist claims while others document payment and transit processes.
Al-Majd Europe scrutiny
The legal and organisational footprint of Al-Majd Europe is contested.
Middle East Eye notes the group's website says it is registered in Germany with headquarters in Jerusalem and offers humanitarian evacuations, food distribution and medical assistance, and that the group did not respond to requests for comment.
Al Jazeera Net reports Israeli coverage (Haaretz) linking the operation to Tomer Janar Lind, who holds Israeli and Estonian passports.
Al Jazeera also notes the group's website claims it was founded in Germany with East Jerusalem offices and finds backing from an Estonia-registered consulting firm, while flagging inconsistencies in the group's web materials that raise credibility issues.
Together, these sources show the organisation claims humanitarian aims, has cross-border registrations reported in different outlets, and has been linked by Israeli reporting to specific persons and companies under investigation by regulators.
Coverage Differences
Organisational origin and accountability
Sources vary on emphasis: Middle East Eye highlights the group's self-description and lack of response, Al-Jazeera Net highlights investigative links to a named individual and an Estonia-registered firm and says Israeli authorities referred the group to immigration authorities, while Al Jazeera emphasises web inconsistencies that undermine the credibility of the group's claims. The contrast shows one source foregrounding activists and registration details, another leaning on Israeli reporting about individuals and firms, and a third stressing misleading online content.
Al‑Majd content scrutiny
Independent checks and fact‑checking reveal further problems with Al‑Majd‑linked material that complicate its humanitarian narrative.
Al Jazeera reports that an 'Impact Stories' page contained timing and attribution errors, noting a story presented as a first‑person account from 'Mona' dated March 22, 2023 even though the website was registered roughly ten months later.
Al Jazeera also found that the accompanying photo for that story is actually of journalist Abeer Khayat, taken by Madeline Edwards in December 2024 for Middle East Eye.
Al‑Jazeera Net likewise notes investigative concerns and reports that the allegations have prompted authorities to probe finances and coordination.
Middle East Eye reports activists highlighting that boarding passes showed a variety of destinations (India, Malaysia, Indonesia), reinforcing activists’ claims that passengers were kept unclear about their final destinations.
These findings collectively suggest misleading web content and contested narratives on the ground, feeding official probes and activist mistrust.
Coverage Differences
Evidence scrutiny and credibility
Al Jazeera (West Asian) focuses on specific fact‑check details — mismatched dates and a misattributed photo — undermining Al‑Majd's content credibility; Al-Jazeera Net (West Asian) emphasises investigative and regulatory scrutiny including financial questions; Middle East Eye (Western Alternative) foregrounds activists' observations about boarding passes and destination confusion to support claims of deception or coercion. Each source contributes different types of evidence: web content inconsistencies, regulatory probes, and on-the-ground anomalies.
Coverage of evacuation probes
The coverage collectively shows active probes and unresolved questions rather than settled facts.
Al-Jazeera Net reports that regulators and South African officials said they were surprised by the arrivals and expressed concern about documentation, financing and who was behind the operation, and are probing the matter.
Al Jazeera says international investigators opened a file after a Nov. 13 flight carried 153 Palestinians to Johannesburg.
Middle East Eye reports activists accuse Israel of exploiting Palestinian desperation.
It also cites an unnamed Israeli military official who told the Associated Press that Israel helped move the evacuees via the Kerem Shalom crossing to Ramon Airport.
Taken together, the three sources document ongoing investigations, conflicting narratives about consent and coordination, and unresolved questions about Al-Majd Europe's role and legitimacy.
This makes transparent answers and official accountability the central outstanding needs.
Coverage Differences
Emphasis on investigations vs. accusations
Al-Jazeera Net (West Asian) highlights regulatory surprise and probes by South African officials; Al Jazeera (West Asian) reports international investigators opening a file after the Nov. 13 flight; Middle East Eye (Western Alternative) foregrounds activist accusations that Israel exploited desperation and quotes an unnamed Israeli military official describing Israeli assistance. The sources thus vary between emphasising formal investigations, reporting facts of investigator action, and broadcasting activist charges and alleged Israeli involvement.