Law. Human. Environment

Sanctions of the European Union as an instrument for the protection of human rights: Current state, challenges and prospects for legal regulation

Vasyl Sendziuk
Download article
Abstract

This article examines the sanctions policy of the European Union as an instrument for the protection of human rights, with a particular focus on the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime of 2020. The aim of the study was to outline the current state of the legal framework, identify the challenges associated with its implementation, and propose directions for its further development. A systematic approach was employed, combining formal legal, comparative legal and historical legal methods. The article considered the development of the global sanctions regime as a “horizontal” (thematic) instrument that enables targeted responses to serious human rights violations regardless of jurisdiction, through a combination of travel bans, asset freezes and prohibitions on making funds available. Practical application has demonstrated its suitability for supporting international human rights standards and facilitating coordination with international partners; however, it has also revealed inconsistencies and selectivity in listings, largely dependent upon the requirement for unanimity within the Council of the European Union. Several procedural risks have been identified, including limited transparency regarding the reasoning behind listings, difficulties faced by sanctioned individuals in accessing evidential material, and inconsistencies in national implementation, particularly concerning visa restrictions and the identification and freezing of assets. The absence of corruption as an independent ground for sanctions narrows the scope of the regime in comparison with its counterparts in the United States and the United Kingdom, thereby limiting its effectiveness against networks in which human rights abuses are intertwined with kleptocratic practices. Cross-regime coordination of sanctions lists has increased, yet remains incomplete, creating opportunities for circumvention. The practical significance of this research lies in the potential use of its findings to broaden the substantive criteria that may justify the imposition of sanctions, enhance transparency and the frequency of list reviews while safeguarding the right to defence, institutionalise monitoring of sanctions implementation at EU level, and strengthen international coordination

Keywords

restrictive measures; targeted sanctions; EU global sanctions regime; international sanctions law; EU foreign policy

Suggested citation
Sendziuk, V. (2026). Sanctions of the European Union as an instrument for the protection of human rights: Current state, challenges and prospects for legal regulation. Law. Human. Environment, 17(2), 179-199. https://doi.org/10.31548/law/2.2026.179
References
  1. Arabi, D., & Lilly, M. (2020). Symbolic act, real consequences: Passing Canada’s Magnitsky law to combat human rights violations and corruption. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 75(2), 163-178. doi: 10.1177/0020702020934504.
  2. Beaucillon, C. (2023). The long arm of collective sovereignty through the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime. European Papers, 8(3), 1679-1695. doi: 10.15166/2499-8249/736.
  3. Cardwell, P.J. (2023). The EU, sanctions and regional leadership. European Security, 32(2), 267-288. doi: 10.1080/09662839.2023.2191692.
  4. Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. (2012, October). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT:en:PDF.
  5. Cookman, D. (2024). Restrictive measures: A question of adequacy or a failure of targeted measures? Journal of Money Laundering Control, 27(7), 13-25. doi: 10.1108/JMLC-12-2023-0195.
  6. Council Decision of the Council of the European Union No. 2021/372 “Amending Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Serious Human Rights Violations and Abuses”. (2021, March). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2021/372/oj.
  7. Council Decision of the Council of the European Union No. 2021/481 “Amending Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Serious Human Rights Violations and Abuses”. (2021, March). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2021/481/oj.
  8. Council Implementing Regulation of the Council of the European Union No. 2021/478 “Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Serious Human Rights Violations and Abuses”. (2021, March). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2021/478/oj.
  9. Council Implementing Regulation of the Council of the European Union No. 2021/371 “Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Serious Human Rights Violations and Abuses”. (2021, March). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2021/371/oj.
  10. Council Regulation of the European Union No. 2020/1998 “Concerning Restrictive Measures Against Serious Human Rights Violations and Abuses”. (2020, December). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/1998/oj.
  11. Datzer, V., Walde, S., & Lonardo, L. (2024). Who is really affected by European Union terrorist sanctions? A critical study on ‘proximity’ in EU case law. European Foreign Affairs Review, 29(1), 115-132. doi: 10.54648/eerr2024005.
  12. Decision of the Council of the European Union No. 2020/1999 “On the Restrictive Measures Against Serious Human Rights Violations and Abuses”. (2020, December). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2020/1999/oj.
  13. Eckes, C. (2022). EU global human rights sanctions regime: Is the genie out of the bottle? Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 30(2), 255-269. doi: 10.1080/14782804.2021.1965556.
  14. Egger, P. H., Ochel, W., & Winner, H. (2024). Analyzing the effects of economic sanctions: Recent theory and evidence. Review of International Economics, 32(S1), 3-9.
  15. Executive Order of the President of U.S. No. 13818 “Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption”. (2017, December). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/26/2017-27925/blocking-the-property-of-persons-involved-in-serious-human-rights-abuse-or-corruption.
  16. Giumelli, F.A. (2024). Comprehensive approach to sanctions effectiveness: Lessons learned from sanctions on Russia. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 30, 211-228. doi: 10.1007/s10610-024-09585-x.
  17. Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act of U.S. (2016, May). Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/284/text.
  18. Gutmann, J., Langer, L., & Neuenkirch, M. (2024). International sanctions and emigration. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 226, article number 106709. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2024.106709.
  19. Hafner-Burton, E.M. (2014). A social science of human rights. Journal of Peace Research, 51(2), 273-286.
  20. Hamilton, T., Lucas, N., Prezanti, A., Smith, M., & Strayer, A. (2024). Targeted sanctions as a pathway to accountability: An active role for civil society? Journal of International Criminal Justice, 22(2), 345-364. doi: 10.1093/jicj/mqae027.
  21. Isaac, S.K., & Fouda, I.M. (2025). The nexus between international sanctions and multilateral negotiations: The case of Iran’s nuclear program. Review of Economics and Political Science, 11(2), 119-135. doi: 10.1108/REPS-03-2025-0033.
  22. Judgment of the General Court of the European Union in Case No. T-212/22 “Prigozhina v. Council of the European Union”. (2023, March). Retrieved from https://infocuria.curia.europa.eu/tabs/document?source=document&docid=273168&mode=req&pageIndex=1&dir=&occ=first&part=1&text=&doclang=EN&cid=5253195.
  23. Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act of Canada. (2017, October). Retrieved from https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/j-2.3/page-1.html.
  24. Kondoch, B. (2024). The limits of UN sanctions under international law: The case of North Korea. Journal of East Asia and International Law, 17(2), 369-386. doi: 10.14330/jeail.2024.17.2.06.
  25. Korkea-aho, E., & Lonardo, L. (2025). How Russia’s war against Ukraine changed EU sanctions decision-making. Journal of European Integration. doi: 10.1080/07036337.2025.2545921.
  26. LexisNexis Risk Solutions. (n.d.). Exploring sanctions alignment and divergence. Retrieved from https://risk.lexisnexis.com/insights-resources/article/thematic-sanctions.
  27. Lizak, O., & Skuza, D. (2024). The Magnitsky Act – the cornerstone of a global anti-corruption sanctions regime established under the auspices of the US. Law and Social Bonds, 47(4), 81-109. doi: 10.36128/PRIW.VI47.544.
  28. Lonardo, L. (2023). Challenging EU sanctions against Russia: The role of the court, judicial protection, and common foreign and security policy. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 25, 40-63. doi: 10.1017/cel.2023.11.
  29. Miadzvetskaya, Y., & Challet, C. (2022). Are EU restrictive measures really targeted, temporary and preventive? The case of Belarus. Europe and the World: A Law Review, 6(1), article number 3. doi: 10.14324/111.444.ewlj.2022.03
  30. Niemeier, T., & Schneider, G. (2024). Counterfactual coercion: Could harsher sanctions against Russia have prevented the worst? Research & Politics. doi: 10.1177/20531680241272668.
  31. Pavlidis, G. (2023). Global sanctions against corruption and asset recovery: A European approach. Journal of Money Laundering Control, 26(1), 4-13. doi: 10.1108/JMLC-10-2021-0120
  32. Portela, C. (2021). The EU human rights sanctions regime: Unfinished business? Revista General de Derecho Europeo, 54.
  33. Portela, C., Tilahun, N., & Peez, A. (2025). Effectiveness of the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime. Brussele: Directorate-General for External Policies, European Parliament.
  34. Rochat, M. (2024). The effectiveness of smart sanctions: Examining divergent outcomes in Myanmar and Zimbabwe. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 61(1). doi: 10.1177/00219096241300448.
  35. Schneider, G., Weber, P.M., & Invernizzi, A. (2025). Discriminatory coercion: Understanding the biases of EU and US sanctions. Journal of Peace Research, 62(7), 2322-2337. doi: 10.1177/00223433241305310.
  36. The Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020 of the United Kingdom. (2020, July). Retrived from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/680/introduction.  
  37. Thein, H.H., Grosman, A., Sosnovskikh, S., & Klarin, A. (2024). Should we stay or should we exit? Dilemmas faced by multinationals under sanctioned regimes. Journal of World Business, 59(6), article number 101585. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2024.101585.
  38. Tilahun, N. (2021). What is the added value of the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime? European Foreign Affairs Review, 26(3), 477-498.
  39. Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (Treaty of Rome). (1957, March 25). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_017.
  40. Tsertsvadze, T. (2023). The European Union’s use of global human rights sanctions in 2023. New York: Open Society Foundations.
  41. Zamfir, I. (2023). Towards an EU global sanctions regime for corruption. European Parliamentary Research Service, 73.340.
  42. Zelyova, N. (2021). Restrictive measures – sanctions compliance, implementation and judicial review challenges in the common foreign and security policy of the European Union. ERA Forum, 22, 159-181. doi: 10.1007/s12027-021-00658-6.