header-logo header-logo

Sanctioned assets: from freeze, to seize, to Kyiv?

24 March 2023 / Maria Nizzero
Issue: 8018 / Categories: Features , International justice , Sanctions , Rule of law
printer mail-detail
115856
Maria Nizzero sets out the complexities of possibly using seized sanctions assets to fund reconstruction in Ukraine
  • The imposition of sanctions has triggered a policy conversation about the potential for permanent confiscation of assets that are currently temporarily frozen under sanctions.
  • However, there are inherent limitations in using sanctions as the basis for permanent asset deprivation.
  • The response to Russian illicit finance should consider short-term and long-term foreign policy goals and desired criminal justice outcomes, and be delimited within the boundaries of the law.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 has prompted an unprecedented surge in sanctions-based asset freezes directed at individuals linked to the Russian government. One year on from the invasion, the EU, the UK and the US all announced new packages of sanctions against Kremlin-linked individuals and those who supported its unlawful aggression against Ukraine.

The assets frozen under sanctions are passive and cannot be retrieved. There is a risk, if sanctions measures are dropped as a condition for ending

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll