Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...and “struck those in the water with ropes” (S.S. para., 11). After seven years of deliberation, the Court found that the standard for extraterritorial jurisdiction was not satisfied and dismissed the case. Lead counsel Violeta Moreno-Lax asserts that to reach this decision the Court winnowed down its jurisdictional jurisprudence so much that the decision “dent[ed] legal certainty, [and] the rule of law grounding the Convention regime.” She concluded that the case rendered the “regime devoid of relevance in migrant rights cases.” Itamar Mann, counsel on the case, echoed this point...

...Portugal and 32 other Council of Europe states. In respect of the latter, their claim was necessarily extraterritorial. While their standing was denied for the reasons outlined above, their bid to expand the Court’s extraterritorial jurisdiction was also rejected.  Under the Convention, the term jurisdiction defines the area in which a State must protect, promote and respect human rights (art. 1). This is usually confined to national borders. The ECtHR has accepted extraterritorial application of the Convention if States hold “effective control over a foreign territory”, or State agents have...

...Iranian academia. In corporate calculus, the cost of distinguishing a civilian Iranian student from a sanctioned entity far outweighs the near-zero revenue from the Iranian market. Consequently, firms often resort to blanket bans. This practice of over-compliance creates a systemic failure identified by UN Special Rapporteur Alena Douhan. In her report on the visit to Iran (A/HRC/51/33/Add.1), she argues that private actors, driven by fear of secondary sanctions, act as unaccountable enforcement agents, expanding sanctions beyond their legal limits. Legally, this violates the requirement of Human Rights Due Diligence under...

[Jens Iverson is an assistant professor of international law at Leiden University.] In November 2025, I wrote on this site about The Power and Responsibility of the EU to Protect the ICC from US Sanctions. There I discussed issues such as the use of the Anti-Coercion Instrument, (AKA “the Big Bazooka”), the Extraterritoriality (Blocking) Statute and the European Commission supported Digital Commons European Digital Infrastructure Consortium (EDIC), all of which could be used to protect the ICC. The simple policy query often presented (in terms of what the EU should do) is usually framed...

...emerging practice relies on domestic frameworks permitting confiscation where assets constitute the proceeds of crime. Rather than seizing assets solely by virtue of sanctions designations, governments have targeted frozen assets traceable to unlawful conduct, especially sanctions evasion – for example, assets moved or concealed in anticipation of imminent sanctions. This approach rests on firmer legal ground and has been upheld by the ECtHR as compatible with property and fair trial rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.   The US has moved furthest along this path. Under the 2023 Consolidated...

...is intended to apply extraterritorially unless Congress clearly indicates otherwise. Thus, on its face, the presumption appears to limit the reach of U.S. law abroad by setting a high threshold for applying statutes extraterritorially. Yet, the presumption does not categorically prohibit extraterritorial application. Rather, it acts as a procedural gatekeeping mechanism. Courts first determine whether the statutory text contains a “clear, affirmative indication” of extraterritorial intent. If no such language exists, the inquiry ends with the statute being confined to domestic application. However, if courts find that there is sufficient...

...will reveal the actual values of the states who as a matter of law are pledged to combat atrocity and impunity. There have been some responses to the sanctions so far, and it is hard to know what is happening beyond the scenes. A 22 August 2025 letter from civil society lists reasons why the sanctions against ICC Judges and Deputy Prosecutors and previous sanctions are objectionable and collect responses from civil society, States Parties, the EU, and the UN. The European Parliament’s response is of particular note, calling on...

...sweeping new round of sanctions against the International Criminal Court (ICC), marking a dramatic escalation in its campaign against the Court.   The Trump administration formally designated the Court itself under its sanctions regime, adding the institution to the US Treasury’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List. This represents a significant escalation from the previous sanctions targeting individual ICC judges and prosecutors. The designation subjects the Court itself to US asset-blocking and transaction restrictions, potentially disrupting its access to financial institutions, commercial services, and technological infrastructure. At the same...

...Chinese shipowners in China, provided they have adopted domestic legislation capable of grounding such claims. This also underscores the duty of those states to protect human rights at sea by regulating the extraterritorial conduct of these companies. Some Preliminary Observations The Akhmad, et. al v. Bumble Bee Foods case is, at its core, a test of home state extraterritorial jurisdiction. That the case is being litigated at all is a significant contribution to the issue of remedy for forced labour aboard foreign vessels operating beyond any territorial jurisdiction. While it...

[Gamze Erdem Türkelli is an assistant research professor in international law, human rights and sustainable development at the Law and Development Research Group, University of Antwerp, the principal investigator of the ERC Starting Grant 2023 funded GENESIS project and a member of the Academic Circle on the Right to Development of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Development.] In the latest of the growing string of climate change litigation against corporations, Hugues Falys, a Belgian farmer is taking TotalEnergies, the number one refiner and distributor of fossil fuels...

...transport sanctioned Russian oil has exposed a jurisdictional gap between flag State jurisdiction, coastal State jurisdiction, and domestic sanctions regimes. As coastal State jurisdiction generally ends at the territorial sea and sanctions regimes are typically tied to territorial or nationality-based jurisdiction, stateless vessels can fall outside the jurisdiction that would ordinarily regulate conduct at sea. The Smyrtos illustrates the difficulties that this jurisdictional gap creates. While Article 110 provides a clear basis for boarding vessels, such as the Smyrtos, where there is a suspicion that the vessel is without nationality...

...important unknown in energy lending decisions is whether a project will become the target of future sanctions. In principle, States can impose sanctions that limit the ability of investors within their jurisdiction to transact with identified targets of the sanctions. Most frequently, such sanctions hope to deprive the target of funds in order to exercise leverage over the target to alter their behavior. Financial institutions frequently are prevented from disbursing funds to targets or third parties if that disbursement would benefit the target. Consequently, energy finance transactions can find themselves...