Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  98 / 536 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 98 / 536 Next Page
Page Background

84

ZUZANA TRÁVNÍČKOVÁ

CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ

The sanctions practice has changed substantially in the recent past 20 years.

From comprehensive sanctions states and international organisations shifted (almost

without any exceptions) to a new form of coercive and restrictive measures – to smart/

targeted sanctions. Current sanctions are strictly targeted towards individuals (assets

freeze, travel ban) or on a particular commodity, so called selective sanctions (arms,

including training and technical assistance, nuclear weapons, petroleum, timber,

aircrafts, luxury goods…).

19

Sanction decisions of the UN, EU and individual states

also define a wide scope of humanitarian exceptions. Especially individually targeted

financial and travel sanctions resolutely do not work as collective punishment. The

UN, EU, as well as particular states have already elaborated transparent and human

rights respecting procedures for the creation of sanctions list (blacklists) and for

de-listing.

Regarding the developments in the recent 20 years, the common conclusion

about the devastating impacts of sanctions is valid no more. The tendency to impose

sanctions with a maximum limitation of possible humanitarian impact was only

disrupted by Russian counter-sanctions imposed in August 2014. Russian sanctions

– in contrast with all other measures – also covered such commodities like meat,

pork, milk and dairy products, fruits and vegetables – that are strictly excluded

from all other sanction regimes. The scope and the directing of Russian Federation

sanctions is very special; it definitely goes far beyond the mainstream of targeted

sanctions practice and probably has negative humanitarian impact – however, not

on people in targeted states but on people in Russia as the sender of restrictive

measures. Let us see Russian measures from 2014 as an exception that proves the

rule that current sanctions are strictly targeted and do not cause such devastating

effects as, unfortunately, some sanction regimes at the beginning of 1990 did.

Conclusion

Prof. Mohamad’s contribution to the legality (permissibility) of unilateral sanctions

is, from my point of view, based mostly on an assessment of sanctions in their

traditional form. For a long time (especially in the 70’s, 80’s and in the first half

of the 90’s), multilateral as well as unilateral sanctions imposed often covered as

wide a range of economic relations with the sanctioned state as possible. Many

sanctions regimes really were comprehensive. The harmfulness and devastating

effects of comprehensive sanctions were proved at the end of the 90’s undoubtedly,

and they led the international community to the shift to a new – and much more

sensitive form of sanctions, to targeted sanctions. Many characteristics that were

true about comprehensive sanctions (human rights impact, humanitarian impact)

19

TRÁVNÍČKOVÁ, Z., ZEMANOVÁ, Š. and PETERKOVÁ, J. ‘Russian Sanctions in the Cntext of

Current Sanctions Practice’ in J. Antal (ed.)

Small States – Big Challenges: The Experience of the EU and

Visegrad Region

(Oeconomica, Praha 2015) 47, 51.