CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

PETER MATUŠKA – NIKOLAS SABJÁN CYIL 14 (2023) remarkable. Mr. Hambalek protested against the measures and initiated proceedings on the national level whereby he seeks to annul the restrictive measures adopted against him. 10 This raises a number of questions, inter alia , the relationship between the EU and national law in the context of applications of EU sanctions. We shall analyse this aspect of the problem and argue that the precedence of EU law must be reaffirmed in such cases. 1. EU Legal Framework Regarding the EU Restrictive Measures The EU sanction policy can be traced back to 1980s when the EU imposed its first autonomous sanctions against the Soviet Union. 11 The EU derives its competence to impose sanctions from Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). It is necessary to emphasize that any sanctions adopted by the EU are reflecting its international policy. The aim of sanctions is at least fourfold: coercion, constraining, changing the behaviour/policy of the targeted state/entity or individual, and also signalling. 12 The EU justifies its restrictive measures through various reasons including a violation of international law or human rights, or pursuing policies or actions that do not conform to the rule of law or democratic principles. Additionally, the EU considers its sanction policy as a tool to stress its economic and political influence around the world. 13 Article 29 of Treaty of European Union (TEU) allows the Council of the European Union (Council) to adopt a decision to impose sanctions against non-EU countries, non state entities, or individuals. The respective Council Regulations are addressed to all persons, entities, and bodies under EU jurisdiction, for which they create legal obligations. In other words, these regulations are directly applicable in EU Member States in the light of the principle of direct effect. Moreover, in case of a conflict with national legislation, the regulation enjoys precedence. According to Article 215 of TEU, the taxonomy of EU sanctions is theoretically based on the distinction between country and individual sanctions. However, this difference is often not so clear. 14 Besides this, another classification is thematic sanctions – e.g., sanctions against 10 ŠELESTIAKOVÁ, K., ‘Zablokovali mu majetok u nás i v Česku. Hambálek z Nočných vlkov sa snaží, aby nebol na sankčnom zozname’ [They blocked his property here and in the Czech Republic. Hambálek from the Night Wolves is trying not to be on the sanctions list], Hospodárske noviny , (Bratislava, 16 March 2023), available only in Slovak. 11 The EU imposed its sanctions against the Soviet Union as a response to events in Poland, and it was followed by an arms embargo against Argentina in spring 1982. KREUTZ, J., Hard Measures by a Soft Power? Sanctions policy of the European Union 1981–2004, BICC, Bonn 2005 Bonn International Center for Conversion, p. 9. However, according to Jentleson, the first major collective sanctions initiated by the EU were against the Soviet Union for its invasion of Afghanistan. JENTLESON, B., W., Sanctions. What everybody needs to know (1 st edn, Oxford University Press 2022) 183. 12 GIUMELLI, F., Coercing, Constraining, Signalling: Explaining UN and EU Sanctions after the Cold War (1 st edn, ECPR Press 2011). 13 Council of the EU, ‘Shared Vision, Common Action – A Stronger Europe: a Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy’ (2016) . 14 LEONARDO, L., EU Common Foreign and Security Policy after Lisbon: Between Law and Geopolitics (1 st edn, Springer 2023) 78.

210