The fight against financing terrorism: New challenges and developments in Hungarian law

G. Kovács, P. Nyitrai
{"title":"The fight against financing terrorism: New challenges and developments in Hungarian law","authors":"G. Kovács, P. Nyitrai","doi":"10.1556/AJur.55.2014.3.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The relevant Hungarian legal regime has been driven by the implementation of anti-terrorist sanctions brought by the United Nations Security Council (hereinafter: UNSC) and the European Council, the relevant domestic legislation has never been infl uenced by local experience. The relevant EC Regulations (e.g. 88 1/2002 and 2580/2001) are self-executing in Hungary (as in all EU member states). The relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSC resolutions) 1267 and 1373 in relation to the freezing of non-banking/ fi nancial assets needs domestic implementation. The sanctions of the UN relevant bodies (qua non-self executing international rules) are formally only binding the states and not, so to say, the fi nancial institutions that will eventually freeze the accounts, it is obviously the state who is bound to simultaneously bear responsibility for keeping its international obligations and uphold internal rule of law.1 The pure administrative “black listing” procedure in Hungary is fully based on the blacklist of UNSC and the Council of the EU. The procedural and substantive standards currently applied in the international black listing procedure and its national implementation do not fulfi ll the minimum standards of the fundamental principles of human rights and the rule of law either. Hungary is facing the problem how to implement the various sanctions regimes whilst respecting their international obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter: ECHR) and the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter: UNCCPR) and how to implement procedural and substantive improvements aimed at safeguarding individual human rights and the rule of law, as a matter of credibility of the international fi ght against terrorism, in particular an appeal mechanism against sanctions imposed by United Nations and European Union bodies. It is important to defi ne the social context in which legal regime imposed by the UNSC, the EU and the Hungarian Government, aimed at freezing assets and fi nancial","PeriodicalId":284706,"journal":{"name":"Acta Juridica Hungarica","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Juridica Hungarica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/AJur.55.2014.3.2","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

The relevant Hungarian legal regime has been driven by the implementation of anti-terrorist sanctions brought by the United Nations Security Council (hereinafter: UNSC) and the European Council, the relevant domestic legislation has never been infl uenced by local experience. The relevant EC Regulations (e.g. 88 1/2002 and 2580/2001) are self-executing in Hungary (as in all EU member states). The relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSC resolutions) 1267 and 1373 in relation to the freezing of non-banking/ fi nancial assets needs domestic implementation. The sanctions of the UN relevant bodies (qua non-self executing international rules) are formally only binding the states and not, so to say, the fi nancial institutions that will eventually freeze the accounts, it is obviously the state who is bound to simultaneously bear responsibility for keeping its international obligations and uphold internal rule of law.1 The pure administrative “black listing” procedure in Hungary is fully based on the blacklist of UNSC and the Council of the EU. The procedural and substantive standards currently applied in the international black listing procedure and its national implementation do not fulfi ll the minimum standards of the fundamental principles of human rights and the rule of law either. Hungary is facing the problem how to implement the various sanctions regimes whilst respecting their international obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter: ECHR) and the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter: UNCCPR) and how to implement procedural and substantive improvements aimed at safeguarding individual human rights and the rule of law, as a matter of credibility of the international fi ght against terrorism, in particular an appeal mechanism against sanctions imposed by United Nations and European Union bodies. It is important to defi ne the social context in which legal regime imposed by the UNSC, the EU and the Hungarian Government, aimed at freezing assets and fi nancial
打击资助恐怖主义:匈牙利法律的新挑战和新发展
匈牙利有关法律制度是在执行联合国安理会和欧洲理事会反恐制裁的基础上建立起来的,有关国内立法从未受到本国经验的影响。相关的欧盟法规(例如88 /2002和2580/2001)在匈牙利(与所有欧盟成员国一样)自动执行。有关冻结非银行/金融资产的联合国安理会第1267号和第1373号决议需要在国内执行。联合国相关机构的制裁(作为一种非自我执行的国际规则)在形式上只对国家有约束力,也就是说,对最终将冻结账户的金融机构没有约束力,显然,国家必须同时承担履行其国际义务和维护国内法治的责任匈牙利的纯行政“黑名单”程序完全基于联合国安理会和欧盟理事会的黑名单。目前在国际黑名单程序及其国家执行中适用的程序和实质性标准也不符合人权和法治基本原则的最低标准。匈牙利面临的问题是,如何在履行《欧洲人权公约》(以下简称《欧洲人权公约》)和《联合国公民权利和政治权利公约》(以下简称《公约》)规定的国际义务的同时,实施各种制裁制度。以及如何实施程序和实质性改进,以保障个人人权和法治,作为国际反恐斗争的信誉问题,特别是针对联合国和欧洲联盟机构实施的制裁的上诉机制。重要的是确定联合国安理会、欧盟和匈牙利政府旨在冻结资产和金融的法律制度所处的社会背景
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