European Court of Justice advisers endorse continued sanctions on Russian oligarchs
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) in Luxembourg could issue a ruling against lifting the freeze on assets belonging to five Russian oligarchs and maintain a visa ban, marking a critical standpoint that reverberates beyond just these cases. This comes after ECJ advisers, whose opinions carry considerable weight with the court, recommended the continuation of the sanctions, according to a report by The Moscow Times.
The advisers also opined that there is no need to establish direct connections between the sanctioned Russian businessmen and President Vladimir Putin’s regime.
The publication highlights that this stance could have significant implications for future cases, signaling that other Russians contesting such sanctions might face serious hurdles in their repeal attempts.
In response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the European Union blacklisted several Russian businessmen, accusing them of supporting the Russian regime through their activities. Among those who challenged this decision at the ECJ are Dmitry Mazepin of Uralchem, Dmitry Pumpyansky from TMK and the Sinara Group, Viktor Rashnikov from MMK, German Khan from Alfa Group, and Tigran Khudaverdyan from Yandex. Their applications were dismissed in 2023, prompting them to appeal.
Before making a final judgment, the EU tasked one of its legal advisers to evaluate the complaints submitted. Although not binding, such legal opinions often guide the ECJ’s final decisions.
The adviser’s opinion underscores a “rational connection” between sanctions targeting leading Russian businessmen, who are significant financial benefactors to Russia's power structure, and the objectives of these restrictive measures. The intention is to pressure the Russian government to cease its aggression in Ukraine by reducing accessible financial resources.
Of even greater significance is another aspect of the adviser’s conclusion: the EU is not required to substantiate the imposition of sanctions with specific actions of the targeted individual, like proving “influence over Russian authorities.” This was a primary argument used by those on the sanction list to assert that the restrictions were unwarranted.
The ECJ is anticipated to issue its final decision on the “Group of Five’s” case in July or potentially after the summer recess. Should it align with the advisory opinion, the ruling will bear implications for approximately 80 other Russian and Belarusian businessmen who have also contested the EU sanctions.