CYIL vol. 14 (2023)

PETER MATUŠKA – NIKOLAS SABJÁN CYIL 14 (2023) in Ukraine and using discarded military equipment. The legal basis for this decision is the Council Regulation 2022/1269 of 21 July 2022. 54 Consequently, due to his activities, Mr. Hambalek is accused of supporting, materially or financially, actions, which undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and independence of Ukraine. 55 As we already explained above, sanctions can be imposed against third countries, natural or legal persons, groups, and non-state entities. The definition of term “third countries” in Article 215(1) TFEU is relatively extensive. It allows the imposition of sanctions pursuant to Article 215(1) TFEU against legal and natural persons who have a sufficient link to the targeted third country. 56 Thus, sanctions against a third country “ may include the rulers of such a country and also individuals and entities associated with or controlled, directly or indirectly, by them ”. 57 Furthermore, the CJEU ruled in recent case Venezuela v Council that even a state itself could challenge the autonomous sanctions adopted by the EU. The Court reasoned that Venezuela should be considered, in light of Article 263 TFEU, a legal person and thus, it enjoys locus standi . 58 However, in regard to individuals, the extent of Article 215(1) TFEU is somewhat limited. As explained by the Court, the said Article does not include individuals who are only connected to the leaders of a third country only on the ground of family connection. 59 The primary purpose of sanctions is to restrict rights of an individual or entity which have been targeted by them. However, the CJEU confirmed that the nature of restrictive measures is preventative, 60 although the measures must fulfil certain procedural criteria which could be divided in three categories: designation criteria; statement of reasons; and the measures must be supported by evidence. 61 Moreover, the Court has emphasized that restrictive measures do not have a criminal character, i.e., they are not imposed as a punishment for violations of criminal law and thus, when it comes to procedural criteria, it is enough to show that there is a “sufficiently solid factual basis” upon which the decision is taken. 62 Now, it is of course uncontroversial that restrictive measures affect fundamental rights set forth in the Charter of Fundamental Rights such as right to property, right to economic activity, or free movement. However, these rights are not absolute and could be limited under certain conditions, i.e., in general interest. A significant part of so-called sanction case law is linked to issue of violations of human rights. These claims could be divided in two separate groups in which the first group is characterized by alleged violation of procedural rights such as the right to effective

54 Council Regulation (EU) 2022/1269 amending Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine [2022] OJ L 193.

55 Ibid, Statement of Reasons. 56 Wouters (n 18), pp. 177–178. 57 Case C- 376/10 P Pye Phyo Tay Za v Council EU:C:2012:138, paras. 63–64.

58 LONARDO, L., ‘The European Court of Justice Allows Third Countries to Challenge EU Restrictive Measures’ (2023) 18(1) European Constitutional Law Review . 59 See also Case T-212/22 Prigozhina v Council [2023] ECLI:EU:T:2023:104. 60 Case C-584/10P Commission and other v Kadi [2013] ECLI:EU:C:2013:518, para. 130. 61 GORDON, R., SMYTH, M., and CORNELL, T., Sanctions Law (Hart Publishing 2019), pp. 156–163. 62 It is not required to prove “beyond reasonable doubt”.

218