UK imposes targeted human rights-based sanctions in first autonomous move

On 6 July 2020, UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab announced the first autonomous sanctions designations since the UK formally left the European Union on 31 January 2020. Modelled on the U.S. Magnitsky Act, the Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020 (S.I. 680/2020) (the Regulations) target State and non-State actors around the globe whom the UK Government has “reasonable grounds to suspect” have been involved in serious human rights violations. The Regulations are made under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (the Act), which provides the UK Government with the authority to impose sanctions that are independent of the current EU regime.

Who are the targets of the measures?

This first wave of designations imposes asset freezes and travel bans on 47 individuals and 2 entities whom the UK Government has evidence to believe are the perpetrators of some of the most high-profile violations of fundamental human rights in recent times.

The designated individuals and entities include those listed for their suspected involvement in the torture and deaths of Russian whistle-blower Sergei Magnitsky and Saudi Arabian journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the human rights violations committed against the Rohingya people, and the enslavement, torture and murder committed in North Korean prison camps.

What is the designation process?

In his statement to the House of Commons, the Foreign Secretary made clear that further designations would be made under the Regulations in the coming weeks and months. A policy paper published alongside the Regulations sets out the grounds on which such designations will be made.

The starting point is the existence of reasonable grounds to suspect that a person/entity has been involved in an activity that represents a serious violation of certain human rights. The designating Minister must also be satisfied that any listing is, “appropriate having regard to the purpose of deterring or providing accountability for such activities, and the likely significant effects on that person, as far as known.”

The following, non-exhaustive, list of factors will then be taken into account:

• The UK Government’s human rights priorities;
• The nature of the victim;
• The seriousness of the conduct and a person’s involvement;
• International profile and collective action;
• Whether a person is a non-State actor;
• The status and connections of the involved person; and
• The effectiveness of alternative measures.

Designations will be reviewed by Government at least once every 3 years, and those subject to designations will be able to challenge their listing by:

• Requesting a ministerial review; and
• Bringing a legal challenge.

What is the impact?

The Regulation is significant in demonstrating the Government’s willingness to take action (informed by existing U.S. and Canadian regimes) against high-profile State and non-State actors in the context of human rights abuses. It is a statement of intent — the Regulations form the first autonomous and enforceable sanctions imposed by the UK in a post-Brexit environment. The announcement also suggested that the UK Government is encouraging the EU to establish a similar framework in the near future.

EU sanctions will no longer apply in the UK after the end of the Brexit Transition Period at the end of this year. While existing EU sanctions regimes will be retained in UK law immediately following 31 December 2020, the UK Government will have the independence to impose, update and lift sanctions to meet its own policy objectives. As we approach the end of the Brexit Transition Period, businesses must ensure that their compliance policies and procedures are able to adapt and respond to developments in the UK Government’s newly independent sanctions policy over the coming months and any divergence from the measures imposed and implement by the EU.

There is likely too, to be pressure on the Government to maintain an independent and reviewable listing process. The nature of the actions and persons targeted by the Regulations risk a lack of verifiable evidence, and create opportunities for review and challenge. More broadly, the independence of the UK regime means an increased ability to contest designations in the UK courts.