What abuses and corrupt acts can be sanctioned in different Magnitsky jurisdictions?
Targeted financial sanctions have become a key tool in holding perpetrators of serious human rights abuse and acts of corruption to account, while also helping deter others from engaging in similar conduct.
Since the United States implemented its Global Magnitsky sanctions program for human rights abuse and corruption in 2017, the United Kingdom, European Union, Canada, and Australia have also adopted similar Magnitsky-style sanctions programs. This has made it possible for these different jurisdictions to amplify the impact of any given sanction through coordinated, multilateral action and to fill the gaps or address the blind spots left by their peers.
In a new resource published today, Human Rights First provides a summary of the scope of global human rights and anticorruption sanctions programs from these five major Magnitsky-style jurisdictions. Each jurisdiction has developed their own criteria for how their respective sanctions programs may be used, including the types of human rights abuses and corrupt acts they cover, the kinds of perpetrators that may be sanctioned, and the degree to which those perpetrators need to have been involved in human rights abuse or corruption to be sanctioned.
Civil society organizations from around the world may contribute to the use of these programs by submitting to these jurisdictions evidence-based recommendations for sanctions against specific perpetrators. HRF’s new resource provides a high-level comparison of these programs to help civil society identify the jurisdictions in which certain acts may be sanctionable.
For human rights abuses, the U.S. Global Magnitsky sanctions program is one of the broadest. It covers “serious human rights abuse,” which includes a wide range of abuses involving violence against the physical person of a victim and deprivations of liberty. The EU’s Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime follows a similar framework but, unlike the U.S. program, explicitly allows for violations of core civic space rights, such as freedom of assembly and association, if they are widespread or systematic. However, imposing sanctions under the EU program requires a unanimous decision by all member states, which can sometimes pose an obstacle. Meanwhile, the UK and Australia programs mirror each other and focus on a more limited list of serious violations of the right to life, right not to be subject to torture, and right to be free from slavery or forced labor.
Canada’s sanctions are uniquely structured through two main programs that each cover both human rights and corruption: the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (JVCFOA) and the Special Economic Measures Act (SEMA). Both are substantively similar regarding the types of human rights abuse and acts of corruption that are sanctionable. However, for sanctions to be imposed on human rights grounds, the JVCFOA requires that victims of such abuse either sought to expose illegal activity carried out by foreign public officials or to exercise, defend, or promote international human rights. SEMA, in contrast, has no such victim status provision.
For acts of corruption, the most notable outlier is the EU, which has not adopted a global anti-corruption sanctions regime. Instead, some EU country-specific sanctions programs include certain acts of corruption as grounds for sanctions. Across the other four jurisdictions, sanctionable acts of corruption generally must be “serious” or “significant” and involve a government nexus, such as bribery of a foreign public official or the misappropriation of state assets. The U.S. Global Magnitsky program and Canada’s JVCFOA are slightly broader than the others and include the transfer of the proceeds of corruption as sanctionable conduct.
Despite some differences in the criteria for imposing sanctions, in general, each program across the five jurisdictions imposes a similar set of consequences: an asset freeze, a travel ban, and a prohibition on transacting or economically dealing with a person after they have been sanctioned. All the programs also allow for sanctions against individuals and entities, including both state and nonstate actors – except for Canada’s JVCFOA, which only covers individuals who are foreign public officials. In general, these programs are used to target foreign individuals or entities (i.e., those from outside the sanctioning jurisdiction), although some, like the U.S. Global Magnitsky program, do allow for sanctions against persons of any nationality (e.g., U.S. persons) under certain circumstances.
Human Rights First is the U.S. co-chair of a global coalition of more than 340 civil society organizations that advocate for the use of these targeted sanctions programs to help address human rights abuse and corruption around the world. Along with our coalition co-leads in the UK, EU, Canada, and Australia, we partner with NGOs in making recommendations to each of our respective jurisdictions.
To learn more about how to join our coalition and contact our team, and to access key resources for civil society, please visit our Global Magnitsky and Targeted Sanctions webpage.
