2.2.1 EU Sanctions in Respect of Actions Relating to Ukraine
On 17 March 2014—thus 10 days before the UN General Assembly passed its
Resolution on the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine—the EU Council adopted Regulation EU/269/2014 concerning “restrictive measures in respect of actions
undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence
of Ukraine”.
19 Also on 17 March 2014, in the context of the EU’s common foreign
and security policy, the EU Council adopted Decision 2014/145/CFSP on the same
subject.
20 On the political level, already on 6 March 2014, the EU Heads of State had
identified a planned referendum on the future status of the Autonomous Republic of
Crimea as being illegal.
Regulation EU/269/2014 imposed financial sanctions on specific individuals and
entities listed in its Annex I. It serves as one of two central legal tools to implement
an EU policy of “non-recognition” towards the annexation of Crimea/Sevastopol to
the Russian Federation. The first instrument could be categorised to target, in
particular, certain individuals and entities while the second instrument has gradually
introduced far-reaching economic sanctions, even directed against Russia itself, thus
representing a new level of political escalation between the EU and Russia.
21 The
applicable EU instruments have been updated regularly since 2014 and shall be
discussed in some more detail below.
22
2.2.1.1 Restrictive Measures and the “Evolution” of Regulation EU/269/
2014
The first and very general version of Article 3 of Regulation EU/269/2014 allowed
the imposition of sanctions against “persons responsible for actions which undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine,
and natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them”. It could be
questioned whether the initial broad formulation of Article 3 of Regulation EU/269/
2014 already fell under the proposition of “intelligent” sanctions. However, the
political developments after 2014 evidence a remarkable legal evolution of this
key provision of the Regulation which identifies the scope of persons and entities
potentially targeted by specific EU sanctions.
19 Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in
respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence
of Ukraine, OJ 2014 L78/6.
20 Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of
actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of
Ukraine, OJ 2014 L78/16.
21 For a continuously updated overview of all legal and political measures introduced by the EU see
https://europa.eu/newsroom/highlights/special-coverage/eu_sanctions_en.
22 A good overview is available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions/ukrainecrisis/.
Sanctions Compliance Risks in International Shipping: Closure of Five. . .
295
On 17 March 2014—thus 10 days before the UN General Assembly passed its
Resolution on the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine—the EU Council adopted Regulation EU/269/2014 concerning “restrictive measures in respect of actions
undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence
of Ukraine”.
19 Also on 17 March 2014, in the context of the EU’s common foreign
and security policy, the EU Council adopted Decision 2014/145/CFSP on the same
subject.
20 On the political level, already on 6 March 2014, the EU Heads of State had
identified a planned referendum on the future status of the Autonomous Republic of
Crimea as being illegal.
Regulation EU/269/2014 imposed financial sanctions on specific individuals and
entities listed in its Annex I. It serves as one of two central legal tools to implement
an EU policy of “non-recognition” towards the annexation of Crimea/Sevastopol to
the Russian Federation. The first instrument could be categorised to target, in
particular, certain individuals and entities while the second instrument has gradually
introduced far-reaching economic sanctions, even directed against Russia itself, thus
representing a new level of political escalation between the EU and Russia.
21 The
applicable EU instruments have been updated regularly since 2014 and shall be
discussed in some more detail below.
22
2.2.1.1 Restrictive Measures and the “Evolution” of Regulation EU/269/
2014
The first and very general version of Article 3 of Regulation EU/269/2014 allowed
the imposition of sanctions against “persons responsible for actions which undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine,
and natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them”. It could be
questioned whether the initial broad formulation of Article 3 of Regulation EU/269/
2014 already fell under the proposition of “intelligent” sanctions. However, the
political developments after 2014 evidence a remarkable legal evolution of this
key provision of the Regulation which identifies the scope of persons and entities
potentially targeted by specific EU sanctions.
19 Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in
respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence
of Ukraine, OJ 2014 L78/6.
20 Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP of 17 March 2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of
actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of
Ukraine, OJ 2014 L78/16.
21 For a continuously updated overview of all legal and political measures introduced by the EU see
https://europa.eu/newsroom/highlights/special-coverage/eu_sanctions_en.
22 A good overview is available at https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions/ukrainecrisis/.
Sanctions Compliance Risks in International Shipping: Closure of Five. . .
295