Defining Elements and Emerging Legal Issues of EU 'Sanctions'

L. Borlini, Stefano Siligardi
{"title":"Defining Elements and Emerging Legal Issues of EU 'Sanctions'","authors":"L. Borlini, Stefano Siligardi","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3287431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With some 40 different types of restrictive measures in force, the European Union is undisputedly one of the major protagonists of today’s sanction regimes. Measures such as selective trade embargos, asset freezes and travel bans have been adopted by the EU not only to implement Security Council mandated sanctions, but also in addition to (as with Iran and North Korea) or in the absence of UN action (as with Syria and Russia). Further, EU recent practice evidences that sanctions (Myanmar and Zimbabwe) have served the EU and its member states’ own interests also with the view to promoting (the European construction of) values generally shared in international society. After outlining the legal discipline and the policy framework of EU restrictive measures, the present article analyses the legal issues emerging with respect to EU sanctions over the last four years. Among these, the 2017 ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the EU in Rosneft, Brexit and its consequences on the implementation/adoption of sanctions by the United Kingdom, and recent developments concerning the legal position of candidate countries which refused to align with the EU sanction adopted in reaction to the Ukraine crisis, are the most important.","PeriodicalId":401648,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law: EU eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3287431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

With some 40 different types of restrictive measures in force, the European Union is undisputedly one of the major protagonists of today’s sanction regimes. Measures such as selective trade embargos, asset freezes and travel bans have been adopted by the EU not only to implement Security Council mandated sanctions, but also in addition to (as with Iran and North Korea) or in the absence of UN action (as with Syria and Russia). Further, EU recent practice evidences that sanctions (Myanmar and Zimbabwe) have served the EU and its member states’ own interests also with the view to promoting (the European construction of) values generally shared in international society. After outlining the legal discipline and the policy framework of EU restrictive measures, the present article analyses the legal issues emerging with respect to EU sanctions over the last four years. Among these, the 2017 ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the EU in Rosneft, Brexit and its consequences on the implementation/adoption of sanctions by the United Kingdom, and recent developments concerning the legal position of candidate countries which refused to align with the EU sanction adopted in reaction to the Ukraine crisis, are the most important.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
界定欧盟“制裁”的要素及新出现的法律问题
欧洲联盟实行了大约40种不同类型的限制性措施,毫无疑问是当今制裁制度的主要参与者之一。欧盟采取了选择性贸易禁运、资产冻结和旅行禁令等措施,不仅是为了执行安理会授权的制裁,而且是在联合国没有采取行动的情况下(如对伊朗和朝鲜)采取的附加措施(如对叙利亚和俄罗斯)。此外,欧盟最近的实践表明,制裁(缅甸和津巴布韦)符合欧盟及其成员国自身的利益,也有利于促进(欧洲构建)国际社会普遍共有的价值观。在概述了欧盟限制措施的法律纪律和政策框架之后,本文分析了过去四年中欧盟制裁方面出现的法律问题。其中,最重要的是2017年欧盟法院大分庭对俄罗斯石油公司的裁决,英国脱欧及其对英国实施/通过制裁的影响,以及最近关于拒绝与欧盟为应对乌克兰危机而采取的制裁保持一致的候选国法律地位的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The European Parliament and Brexit Commission v Poland C-562/19 P: Turnover Taxation and State Aid Law Brexit and the Implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement The EU Protection of Tax Data Transferred to Third Countries 'Re-Constituting' the Internal Market: Towards a Common Law of International Trade?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1