Aave and Kelp DAO Push Arbitrum Vote to Transfer $71M in Frozen ETH After Court Order

Aave and victims of the Kelp DAO hack have submitted an Arbitrum governance proposal to transfer 30,765 ETH — worth approximately $71 million — to an Aave LLC address, following a court order from Manhattan Judge Margaret Garnett. The vote is scheduled to begin on May 15, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing legal and financial dispute over funds frozen after the hack.

Background of the Frozen Funds

The funds in question were frozen after being linked to a hack attributed by blockchain analytics firms to the Lazarus Group, a North Korean hacking organization. Even if the proposal passes and the transfer occurs, the ETH cannot be used, moved, or managed without explicit court permission, ensuring the funds remain under judicial oversight.

Ownership Dispute Intensifies

Aave maintains that the ETH belongs to the hack victims, not the hackers, escalating the situation into a complex ownership dispute between DeFi victims and a group of terror judgment creditors. Attorneys representing families of North Korean terrorism victims argue that if the frozen funds are definitively linked to North Korea, they could be used to satisfy approximately $877 million in unpaid compensation judgments.

Separate Legal Actions

Separately, this same group of creditors has sued the privacy protocol Railgun DAO in a different lawsuit, alleging it permitted the movement of North Korea-linked funds. This broader legal strategy underscores the creditors’ determination to recover funds from any entity connected to North Korean state-sponsored hacking activities.

Why This Matters

This case highlights the growing intersection of decentralized finance (DeFi) and international law, where frozen assets from hacks become subject to competing claims from victims and third-party creditors. The outcome of the Arbitrum vote and subsequent court decisions could set a precedent for how frozen crypto assets are handled in legal disputes involving state-sponsored hacking groups.

Conclusion

The Arbitrum governance vote on May 15 will be a critical test of how DeFi protocols navigate legal obligations while protecting user assets. As the ownership dispute unfolds, the broader implications for the crypto industry — particularly regarding compliance with court orders and the treatment of frozen funds — remain significant.

FAQs

Q1: What is the purpose of the Arbitrum governance vote?
The vote aims to approve the transfer of 30,765 ETH (approximately $71 million) from frozen accounts to an Aave LLC address, complying with a court order while keeping the funds under judicial control.

Q2: Who is claiming the frozen funds?
Attorneys for families of North Korean terrorism victims argue the funds could be used to satisfy $877 million in unpaid judgments, while Aave maintains the ETH belongs to the Kelp DAO hack victims.

Q3: What happens after the transfer?
Even if the transfer is approved, the funds cannot be moved or used without court permission, leaving the final ownership to be determined by ongoing legal proceedings.