No Result
View All Result
SUBSCRIBE | NO FEES, NO PAYWALLS
MANAGE MY SUBSCRIPTION
NEWSLETTER
Corporate Compliance Insights
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
Corporate Compliance Insights
Home Compliance

The Global (Mis)alignment of Human Rights Sanctions

Countries generally agree sanctions are useful tools, but greater alignment is needed

by Vincent Gaudel
March 1, 2023
in Compliance
magnitsky act

There’s no shortage of measures designed to safeguard human rights across the globe, but Washington, London and Brussels have yet to fully see eye-to-eye on what entities to target. Vincent Gaudel from LexisNexis Risk Solutions sets the stage for what to expect in the evolution of thematic human rights sanctions.

Combating human rights violations and corruption is a common goal among world powers, and with good reason. No nation wants to become known as a habitual human rights violator.

Localized human rights violations have long been a driver for the implementation of country-specific sanctions. However, with the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act of 2016, the U.S. became the first major country to implement a worldwide, thematic sanctions program aimed at protecting human rights and fighting corruption.

The advantage of thematic sanctions is that they offer great latitude to apply penalties regarding a specific issue wherever it occurs, without requiring a new legal instrument for each issue. Nations and global regulatory bodies introduced thematic sanctions as a response to terrorism, which is a threat that, despite hotspots, exists beyond national borders.

xuar forced labor protest
Compliance

Where Does Your Cotton Come From? Dismantling Global Forced Labor Requires Pinpoint Supply Chain Transparency

by Erika Peters
August 10, 2022

At any given time on earth, an estimated 25 million people are forced to work against their will. The human rights atrocities alleged in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region have rightly generated outrage and political action.

Read more

Unlike traditional sanctions programs focusing on a particular country or region, the Global Magnitsky Act uses thematic sanctions to target serious human rights abuses and corruption. The name comes from Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, whom Russian officials detained and beat after he exposed corruption in Russia. He subsequently died.

Magnitsky-like sanctions do not replace traditional geographic sanctions but complement those programs by providing governments with policy tools that have a global reach, enabling them to respond quickly to global issues like human rights abuses or grand corruption.

The UK, EU, Canada, Estonia, Lithuania and others have borrowed from the U.S. playbook and implemented their own Magnitsky-like sanctions, some even adopting the name Magnitsky. More countries continue to follow suit. In December 2021, Australia amended its Autonomous Sanctions Act to include Magnitsky-like sanctions regulations that give the government the ability “to respond flexibly and swiftly to a range of situations of international concern.”

Exploring sanctions alignment and divergence

In spite of the absence of global human rights sanctions at the UN level, recent policy developments around the world suggest a shared objective among a number of like-minded countries to tackle human rights abuse and corruption. There is also a clear trend toward greater use of thematic sanctions to meet that goal. As such, we may expect to see a certain degree of alignment in listed targets. In reality, however, the opposite is true — there is a notable level of divergence.

Our data gathered at the end of 2022 supports this point. Of the 749 records listed under human rights and corruption sanctions programs of the U.S., EU and UK, only about 3% of entries (24) see a listing by two of the three regulators. Less than 1% of entries (five) have a listing from all three regulators. These numbers may appear surprising but illustrate a stark misalignment of targets for sanctions programs that seemingly pursue the same aims.

Looking at the actual targets of the EU, UK and U.S., the first interesting indicator is the total number of entries on each list. At 606 total entries (entities, individuals and vessels) representing more than 60 nationalities, the U.S. has more than four times as many entries on its OFAC Global Magnitsky Sanctions Program (GLOMAG) list than the UK and EU combined. Both scope and timing influence this sizable difference.

Let’s first look at scope.

The GLOMAG program in the U.S. and the UK programs encompass both human rights violations and corruption. The EU, on the other hand, covers only human rights abuses. The current EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime (GHRSR) does not consider corruption in connection with human rights violations as an offense punishable by restrictive measures. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, wants to include corruption in its human rights sanctions regime, but EU member states still need to vote and adopt the regulation once the Commission tables the proposal. The narrower scope of the EU list helps account for fewer targets compared with the U.S. and UK.

Timing is another element that contributes to the sizable difference in the number of entries on each list. The U.S. started its designations in 2017 — the earliest of the three regulators — so it stands to reason that it would have a greater number of entries. The UK introduced its Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations in July 2020 followed by the Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations nine months later in April 2021. By contrast, the EU introduced GHRSR in December 2020, with the first designation made in May 2021. It does not include corruption.

Regardless of differences in scope and timing, the lack of overlap in entries among the three regulators is still surprising. Although countries share the common goal of preventing human rights abuses and corruption, there is clearly a wide variation on who or what entity to sanction.

Global issues, local sanctions exposure

With thematic sanctions becoming more widespread, entities worldwide risk being exposed to a target of such global sanctions programs. Global bodies target individuals and entities located anywhere in the world. They may very well be right in your backyard.

In 2021, OFAC’s single largest set of designations did not relate to comprehensively sanctioned countries such as Iran, North Korea or Syria but to a Bulgarian corruption network. The SDN List saw 67 people and entities added that year.

Bulgaria is not alone. The U.S. imposed sanctions through GLOMAG on 92 targets across seven EU countries, including Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands (15% of GLOMAG targets). Further, 325 targets are in nine of the G20 countries and account for 43% of the EU, U.S. and UK targets. Countries with reportedly a high level of corruption or with a poor record in human rights protection are unsurprisingly well-represented. Sometimes country-specific sanctions programs are used for poor performers like Myanmar, Venezuela and Iran.

The broad range of nationalities represented on these major sanctions lists underscores the importance of acknowledging the global reach of thematic sanctions to tackle perpetrators of human rights violations and corruption, regardless of the country of origin.

Looking ahead

Thematic sanctions are clearly here to stay. They are an important tool that combats global issues. Unlike country or region-based sanctions, the addition of global, thematic sanctions programs like human rights and corruption means no jurisdiction is immune to potential exposure.

So, what does the future hold? If the GLOMAG program for U.S. designations is any guide, the future of human rights sanctions points to an upward trend in using these programs, with entries and lists growing longer as programs mature. Recent indications from the U.S. government point to greater commitment to incorporating multilateral cooperation where possible. This would likely result in greater alignment on the lists of entities sanctioned under global human rights and corruption programs, through initiatives such as the recently announced OFAC-OFSI Enhanced Partnership.

If the international community is truly serious about combating human rights abuses and corruption, then working toward greater alignment of sanctions among the U.S., UK, EU and other like-minded countries is a key step toward a more effective response to those global issues. Since 2019, the U.S. seems to be using GLOMAG designations as a clear indication of its commitment, with landmark designations issued each Dec. 10, International Human Rights Day.

OFAC marked this past Dec. 10 with a designation of a network of companies involved in illegal fishing through a fleet of more than 150 vessels. They added all of the companies to the SDN list for a variety of abuses, notably the widespread use of forced labor. This action includes the designation of a NASDAQ-listed company, a first for OFAC.

Financial institutions and international businesses are at the forefront in implementing sanctions by ensuring effective sanctions compliance. However, they can go one step further by screening for enforcement information and negative news to proactively flag violations while implementing a risk-based approach to identify entities that may be involved in human rights or corruption. Beyond the regulatory risks of dealing with sanctioned entities, organizations should also be mindful of the potential reputational and business implications of being associated with human rights abusers or corrupt entities.


Previous Post

Cloud Security Isn’t Just on Your Provider; It’s Your Job, Too

Next Post

1-2-3s of ABAC Compliance Programs

Vincent Gaudel

Vincent Gaudel

Vincent Gaudel is a financial crime compliance expert and certified global sanctions specialist at LexisNexis Risk Solutions. In his role, he monitors international sanctions and financial crime regulatory developments, helping clients navigate complex regulatory requirements.

Related Posts

Fox_DOJ Speeches_f

Analysis of Recent DOJ Statements

by Corporate Compliance Insights
March 23, 2023

DOJ leaders provide insight into agency's plans. Analysis of Recent Statements DOJ Shaping the Future of Corporate Criminal Enforcement What’s...

Fox_2023 ECCP Update_f

2023 Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs

by Corporate Compliance Insights
March 23, 2023

Keeping up with 2023 changes to DOJ guidelines. Additions, Deletions & Changes From 2020 2023 Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs...

encompass update

Encompass Launches pKYC Maturity Model

by Corporate Compliance Insights
March 22, 2023

KYC automation platform Encompass has unveiled a new perpetual Know Your Customer (pKYC) maturity model designed to help banks improve...

consilio onna partnership

Consilio, Onna Seek to Streamline eDiscovery for Cloud Apps

by Corporate Compliance Insights
March 22, 2023

Legal technology provider Consilio has launched a new platform, Sightline Collect, powered by data management supplier Onna. The platform is...

Next Post
abac

1-2-3s of ABAC Compliance Programs

Compliance Job Interview Q&A

Jump to a Topic

AML Anti-Bribery Anti-Corruption Artificial Intelligence (AI) Automation Banking Board of Directors Board Risk Oversight Business Continuity Planning California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) Code of Conduct Communications Management Corporate Culture COVID-19 Cryptocurrency Culture of Ethics Cybercrime Cyber Risk Data Analytics Data Breach Data Governance DOJ Download Due Diligence Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) ESG FCPA Enforcement Actions Financial Crime Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) GDPR HIPAA Know Your Customer (KYC) Machine Learning Monitoring RegTech Reputation Risk Risk Assessment SEC Social Media Risk Supply Chain Technology Third Party Risk Management Tone at the Top Training Whistleblowing
No Result
View All Result

Privacy Policy

Founded in 2010, CCI is the web’s premier global independent news source for compliance, ethics, risk and information security. 

Got a news tip? Get in touch. Want a weekly round-up in your inbox? Sign up for free. No subscription fees, no paywalls. 

Follow Us

Browse Topics:

  • CCI Press
  • Compliance
  • Compliance Podcasts
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data Privacy
  • eBooks Published by CCI
  • Ethics
  • FCPA
  • Featured
  • Financial Services
  • Fraud
  • Governance
  • GRC Vendor News
  • HR Compliance
  • Internal Audit
  • Leadership and Career
  • On Demand Webinars
  • Opinion
  • Resource Library
  • Risk
  • Uncategorized
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • Well-Being
  • Whitepapers

© 2022 Corporate Compliance Insights

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Explore Topics
    • See All Articles
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Well-Being at Work
    • Leadership and Career
    • Opinion
  • Vendor News
  • Career Connection
  • Events
    • Calendar
    • Submit an Event
  • Library
    • Whitepapers & Reports
    • eBooks
    • CCI Press & Compliance Bookshelf
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe

© 2022 Corporate Compliance Insights

Welcome to CCI. This site uses cookies. Please click OK to accept. Privacy Policy
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT