Confiscation of Property in the Context of Sanctions Policy: Legal Aspects

V. Slepak
{"title":"Confiscation of Property in the Context of Sanctions Policy: Legal Aspects","authors":"V. Slepak","doi":"10.17803/1994-1471.2023.151.6.122-133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Western sanctions regimes show a high degree of coordination. This applies to almost all aspects of the sanctions policy, including approaches to the possibility of confiscating the property of persons subject to blocking sanctions. However, countries that support autonomous sanctions against Russia follow different paths towards the common goal. The emerging approaches to confiscation make it possible to single out two main areas of legal regulation of this issue. In the legislation of the respective country confiscation can be considered either as an instrument of sanctions legislation, or as a measure of responsibility for violating sanctions legislation. Only two countries have so far chosen to use confiscation as an independent instrument of sanctions policy: Ukraine and Canada. Perhaps the United States will join them, but at present, similar to Switzerland, they use confiscation only as part of countering illegal activities. The draft directives developed by the European Commission demonstrate the EU’s commitment not to jeopardize the obligation to protect private property and provide for the possibility of confiscation in exceptional cases as a measure of influence in the fight against criminal activity. Given the importance of protecting private property for a favorable investment climate, it is most likely that the second path will become dominant: asset confiscation will be seen only as a means of responding to violations of the laws of a country that supports autonomous sanctions.","PeriodicalId":158497,"journal":{"name":"Actual Problems of Russian Law","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Actual Problems of Russian Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2023.151.6.122-133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Western sanctions regimes show a high degree of coordination. This applies to almost all aspects of the sanctions policy, including approaches to the possibility of confiscating the property of persons subject to blocking sanctions. However, countries that support autonomous sanctions against Russia follow different paths towards the common goal. The emerging approaches to confiscation make it possible to single out two main areas of legal regulation of this issue. In the legislation of the respective country confiscation can be considered either as an instrument of sanctions legislation, or as a measure of responsibility for violating sanctions legislation. Only two countries have so far chosen to use confiscation as an independent instrument of sanctions policy: Ukraine and Canada. Perhaps the United States will join them, but at present, similar to Switzerland, they use confiscation only as part of countering illegal activities. The draft directives developed by the European Commission demonstrate the EU’s commitment not to jeopardize the obligation to protect private property and provide for the possibility of confiscation in exceptional cases as a measure of influence in the fight against criminal activity. Given the importance of protecting private property for a favorable investment climate, it is most likely that the second path will become dominant: asset confiscation will be seen only as a means of responding to violations of the laws of a country that supports autonomous sanctions.
制裁政策下的没收财产:法律方面
西方的制裁机制显示出高度的协调。这适用于制裁政策的几乎所有方面,包括关于没收受封锁制裁的人的财产的可能性的办法。然而,支持对俄罗斯实施自主制裁的国家朝着共同目标走着不同的道路。正在出现的没收办法使我们能够挑出对这一问题进行法律管制的两个主要领域。在有关国家的立法中,没收既可以被视为制裁立法的工具,也可以被视为违反制裁立法的责任措施。迄今为止,只有两个国家选择将没收作为制裁政策的独立工具:乌克兰和加拿大。也许美国也会加入其中,但目前,与瑞士类似,他们只是将没收作为打击非法活动的一部分。欧洲委员会制定的指令草案表明,欧盟承诺不损害保护私有财产的义务,并规定在例外情况下可以没收财产,作为打击犯罪活动的影响措施。鉴于保护私有财产以创造有利的投资环境的重要性,第二种途径很可能占据主导地位:资产没收将被视为对支持自主制裁的国家违反法律行为作出反应的一种手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信