Sweden Explains It All: Iran nuclear technology sanctions

The historical background on the EU's sanctions against Iran based on its pursuit of nuclear technology:

In recent years, the UN Security Council has adopted several resolutions containing sanctions against Iran. These are based on the suspicion that Iran is building up a capacity to develop nuclear weapons, i e nuclear explosive devices and delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons systems. In the past, Iran has not heeded the repeated resolutions on the issue by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), nor has it accepted the negotiation proposals offered. The aim of the Security Council resolutions is to induce Iran to act in such a way as to restore the world's confidence that its nuclear activities have exclusively civilian and peaceful purposes.

In a resolution (1737) of December 2006, the Security Council required that Iran suspend all nuclear activities related to enrichment and reprocessing, as well as all work on heavy water-related projects. The resolution imposed certain sanctions against Iran. Since Iran did not fulfil the UN Security Council requirements within the time limit set, the Council adopted further resolutions (1747 and 1803) tightening and expanding the sanctions in March 2007 and March 2008. The latest Security Council resolution against Iran (1929), which further tightened sanctions against the country, was adopted on 9 June 2010. The resolution focuses primarily on a strengthened arms embargo and on measures linked to the area of nuclear and missile technology, but it also paves the way for measures targeting the energy sector. The targeted measures are also extended to include the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and the transport sector, in particular an Iranian shipping company (Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Line) and its many subsidiaries. All of the resolutions state that the sanctions will be rescinded by means of a decision in the Security Council if Iran fulfils the requirements set by the Security Council.

Most of the sanctions imposed are binding on UN Member States. To implement them in the EU, the Council of the European Union has adopted common positions and Council decisions (originally common position 2007/140/CFSP, with several subsequent supplementary decisions) that essentially follow the Security Council resolutions, but clarify or tighten the sanctions on some points. The latest Security Council resolution was implemented by the EU via a Council decision of 26 July 2010 (2010/413/CFSP), which also incorporated all the previous EU sanction decisions and therefore supersedes the previous positions and decisions. The decision also tightened the EU sanctions against Iran beyond what was stipulated in the Security Council resolution, in areas including trade (primarily in dual-use products), transport (aviation and shipping) and the energy and financial sectors. Furthermore, individual restrictions in the form of freezing of assets and travel bans to the EU were imposed on a number of additional natural and legal persons with links to the Iranian nuclear or missile technology programme, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The annexes to this Council decision listing natural and legal persons have been revised on two occasions during 2011, partly through Council Decision 2011/299/CFSP of 23 May 2011, and partly through Council Decision 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011.

On 23 January 2012, the EU decided, without reference to any new Security Council Resolution, to independently expand the sanctions against Iran, primarily in the energy and financial sectors. This occurred through Council Decision 2012/35/CFSP which involved amendments to Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP, which is still in effect as the underlying decision. Further specific supplementary decisions were also made (Council Decision 2012/152/CFSP of 15 March 2012 and Council Decision 2012/169/CFSP of 23 March 2012). All the categories of the underlying Council decision and the subsequent supplementary decisions that pertain to EU law have now been incorporated into Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012, see below.

Most of the sanctions come under the jurisdiction of the EU and are implemented through EU regulations adopted by the Council of the European Union. The original regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007, was subsequently supplemented with several additional regulations for the implementation of sanctions against Iran. On 25 October 2010, a consolidated regulation, Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010, was adopted, which drew together the latest sanction-tightening measures and previous sanctions, and thereby superseded all of the previous regulations concerning sanctions against Iran. The further tightening of the sanctions decided by the EU in its Council decision of 23 January 2012, like the supplementary Council decisions from 2011, have been operationalised and are now contained in a new regulation, Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012, adopted by the EU on 23 March 2012. This regulation also contains the provisions previously contained in Council Regulation (EU) No. 961/2010. It thereby entirely supersedes Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010, which has been repealed. Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 is directly applicable in Sweden and applies as Swedish national law. Should the Security Council decide to rescind its sanctions, the EU must determine whether to rescind or amend its own sanctions in a decision of its own.

and what those entail:

and what are the relevant EU/EC council decisions:

The EU documents setting out the sanctions are available for download here. The sanctions are currently regulated in the following twelve Council Decisions: the original Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP of 26 July 2010, and amendments and additions made through Council Decisions 2010/644/CFSP of 25 October 2010, 2011/299/CFSP of 23 May 2011, 2011/783/CFSP of 1 December 2011, 2012/35/CFSP of 23 January 2012, 2012/152/CFSP of 15 March 2012, 2012/169/CFSP of 23 March 2012, 2012/205/CFSP of 23 April 2012, 2012/457/CFSP of 2 August 2012, 2012/635/CFSP of 15 October 2012, 2012/687/CFSP of 6 November 2012 and 2012/829/CFSP of 21 December 2012. These supersede common position 2007/140/CFSP and its subsequent amendments, which have now been repealed.

The parts of the sanctions pertaining to EU law are now regulated in Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012, as added to and amended by Council Regulations (EU) Nos 350/2012 of 23 April 2012, 708/2012 and 709/2012 of 2 August 2012, 945/2012 of 15 October 2012, 1016/2012 of 6 November 2012, 1067/2012 of 14 November 2012, and 1263/2012 and 1264/2012 of 21 December 2012. Council Regulation (EC) No 267/2012 supersedes Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 and its successor Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010, which was also amended several times and has now been repealed.

Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 contains a number of annexes:

Annex I contains a list of the dual-use products contained in the annex to the general EU Regulation on such products (Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items) that are not covered by the prohibition on exports etc. to Iran. The other products contained in Regulation 428/2009 are covered by the prohibition. Regulation 428/2009 is also available for downloading here.

Annex II lists additional dual-use products that are prohibited for export, etc. to Iran.

Annex III lists dual-use products that may only be exported, etc. to Iran subject to authorisation.

Annex IV lists the Iranian oil and petrochemical products that are prohibited for import, transport, etc.

Annex IVA lists the products referred to as 'natural gas' that are prohibited for import etc. from Iran.

Annex V lists the Iranian petrochemical products that are prohibited for import, etc.

Annex VI lists equipment and technology for the oil and gas sector and the petrochemicals industry that are prohibited for export, etc. to Iran.

Annex VIA lists other important equipment and technology for the Iranian oil and gas sector and the petrochemicals industry that are prohibited for export etc. to Iran.

Annex VIB lists important naval equipment that is prohibited for export etc. to Iran.

Annex VII lists gold, diamonds and other precious metals that are prohibited for export etc. to the Iranian Government, and purchase and import from the same.

Annex VIIA lists software that is prohibited for export etc. to Iran.

Annex VIIB lists the graphite and metal products that are prohibited for export etc. to Iran.

Annex VIII lists the persons, entities and bodies whose assets have been frozen by decision of the UN.

Annex IX lists the persons, entities and bodies whose assets have been frozen by decision of the EU.

Annex X lists the equivalent websites to this sanctions website in all the EU Member States, where information can be found concerning the competent authorities designated in each country for certain matters under the Regulation.

The natural persons listed in Annex VIII and Annex IX of the Regulation are also, with one or two exceptions, subject to travel restrictions under Annex I and Annex II of Council Decision 2010/413/CFSP.

The applicable Swedish ordinance concerning certain sanctions against Iran (2007:704) and the ordinance amending it (2011:174) can also be downloaded.

It should be noted that Sweden's web page says that these English translations may be somewhat out of date and that one should use the Swedish as a definitive source.

And we will delve into each of these subsections in subsequent posts.

Link:

Sweden EU Iran sanctions page

 

Brits end the week with a bang!

Three updates from Her Majesty's Treasury (HMT) today. First, the following entity (the notice says person, but Mr. Watchlist knows how to read) has been removed from the Libyan sanctions, in line with Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 74/2014:

LIBYAN HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE BOARD (HIB)

Address: Tajora, Tripoli, Libya.

Other Information: EU listing. Not UN. Under control of Muammar Qadhafi and hisfamily, and potential source of funding for his regime. Legislation no 60/2006 byLibyan General People's Committee. Tel +218 21 369 1840. Fax +218 21 369 6447.www.hib.org.ly.

Group ID: 11665.

Second, in accordance with Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 75/2014, the following Sudanese sanctions listings have been amended:

  1. BADRI BAREY, Gabril, Abdul, KareemTitle: General

    a.k.a: BAREY, Gibril, Abdul, Kareem
    Position: Field Commander of the National Movement for Reform and Development
    Address: Tine, Sudan
    Other Information: Also referred to as “Tek”
    Group ID: 8837.

  2. ELHASSAN, Gaffar, Mohammed
    Title: Major-General
    DOB: 24/06/1953
    1952
    a.k.a: ELHASSAN, Gaffar, Mohmed
    Position: Commander of the Western Military Region for the Sudanese ArmedForces

    Address: El Waha, Omdurman, Sudan
    National ID:4302 (Ex-serviceman’s identification card no)
    Other Information: Retired from the Sudanese Army. Remains listed as GaffarMohamed Elhassan by the EU
    Group ID: 8838.

  3. HILAL, MusaTitle: Sheikh

    Position: Paramount Chief of the Jalul Tribe in North Darfur. Member of theNational Assembly of Sudan. In 2008, appointed by the President ofSudan as Special adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

    Group ID: 8836.

4. SHANT SHARIF, Adam, Yacub

DOB: –/–/1976

a.k.a: (1) SHARIF SHANT, Adam, Yacub

(2) YACOUB, Adam

Position: Sudanese Liberation Army Commander

Other Information: Reportedly deceased on 7 June 2012. DOB is approximate.Group ID: 8839.

Finally, under the TAFA regulations (Terrorism Asset-Freezing Act etc. 2010), the following final designation has been renewed for another year:

1. HUSSAIN, Nabeel

DOB: 10/03/1984.

Address: (1) London, United Kingdom, E17.

page4image2536

(2) London, United Kingdom (previous address), SE6.
(3) London, United Kingdom (previous address), E4 .

(3) London, United Kingdom (previous address), E4 .

(4) Ilford, Essex, United Kingdom (previous address), IG1.

Other Information: UK listing only. Male.Group ID: 8961.

page4image3948 page4image4032

Links:

HMT Libya Notice

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 74/2014

HMT Sudan Notice

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 75/2014

HMT Terrorism Notice

 

SECO relaxes Iranian sanctions

SECO released a notice about a change to the sanctions on Iran, although it clearly states that the overwhelming majority of measures remain in place. If Google Translate is to be believed, the threshold for reporting to and receiving authorization from SECO for payments to and from Iran is temporarily increased to 10 times the normal amount, from January 30 to August 14 of this year.

Links:

SECO Notice

 

Sweden Explains It All: Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)

This is the history of the EU Congo sanctions:

The situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has long been very serious, with an armed conflict still in progress in the eastern parts of the country contributing to a difficult security situation for the civilian population. Conflicting political ambitions, underlying economic interests and interference from regional actors undermine the peace efforts. The illegal mining of the country's natural resources plays a key role in the financing of the conflicts in the east and is therefore closely linked to the causes and duration of the conflicts.

In July 2003 the UN Security Council introduced sanctions against the Kivu provinces and the Ituri district in the eastern parts of the DRC. Violence in these areas of the country and violations of human rights and international humanitarian law were considered to pose a threat to international peace and security (see UN Security Council Resolution 1493 (2003)). Initially, an arms embargo was introduced aimed at this specific part of the country, although it did not apply to the UN peacekeeping mission MONUC, which has now been replaced by the United Nations Organisation Stabilisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO). In light of the continued illicit flow of weapons in the DRC, additional sanctions were introduced in 2005 which then applied to the entire country. Resolution 1596 (2005) expanded the arms embargo to apply to recipients throughout the DRC's territory, while exempting the government's security forces under certain conditions, prohibited technical and financial assistance in connection with the arms embargo, introduced travel bans for and froze the assets of certain persons and entities. Certain restrictions were also introduced on air traffic in the most troubled provinces of eastern Congo. Since then, several UN resolutions have been adopted and the sanctions against the DRC have subsequently been modified and extended.

The EU has implemented the sanctions that have been adopted by the UN Security Council.

and what they entail:

1. Arms embargo, etc.

It is prohibited to directly or indirectly provide, sell or transfer arms and related materiel, including ammunition, military vehicles and equipment, paramilitary equipment or related spare parts to all non-state entities and individuals in the territory of the DRC. It is also prohibited to offer technical and financial assistance in connection with the arms embargo. These sanctions do not apply to materiel intended solely for support to the UN stabilisation mission in the DRC (MONUSCO). Also, non-lethal military equipment intended solely for humanitarian or protective use is allowed to be provided. The UN Security Council has established a Sanctions Committee for the DRC to handle issues related to exemptions from the arms embargo. Exemptions must be reported to and approved by this Committee in order to be approved by the competent national authority.

2. Travel restrictions

The persons listed are prohibited from entry into, or transit through, the EU. Persons who may be subject to listing include those who violate the arms embargo, political and military leaders of both Congolese and foreign armed groups who impede disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration, or those who recruit or use children in armed conflict as well as persons who commit serious crimes against children or women in situations of armed conflict, prevent humanitarian access, illegally support armed groups in eastern DRC through the illicit trade of natural resources, act for or on behalf of a listed person or participate in attacks on MONUSCO. The list of the persons concerned is drawn up and amended by the UN Security Council Sanctions Committee for the DRC, which can also grant exemptions in some cases. The EU implements the decisions of the Sanctions Committee on an ongoing basis.

3. Freezing of assets

All assets and economic resources belonging to listed persons or entities are to be frozen. It is also prohibited to place assets or economic resources at their disposal. The criteria for the listing of persons and, where appropriate, entities are the same as for travel restrictions. As mentioned with regard to travel restrictions, the list is drawn up and amended by the Sanctions Committee. The EU implements the decisions of the Sanctions Committee on an ongoing basis. Certain exceptions from the freezing of assets may be permitted for humanitarian purposes, etc.

And the relevant EU decisions:

The sanctions are now collected in Council Decision 2010/788/CFSP, which also contains a list of the persons and entities subject to travel restrictions and the freezing of assets. Council Decision 2012/811 introduced additional and partially adjusted criteria for such measures and a further exemption from the provision on travel restrictions. Furthermore, additional persons were added to the list. Amendments to this list have also been made on an ongoing basis through Council Implementing Decision 2011/699/CFSP, 2011/848/CFSP and 2013/46/CFSP, in accordance with decisions of the Sanctions Committee. The parts of the arms embargo pertaining to EU law (prohibition of technical and financial assistance) are regulated in Council Regulation (EC) No 889/2005, amended by Council Regulations (EC) Nos 1377/2007 and 666/2008. The freezing of assets is covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005, amended by Council Regulation (EU) No 521/2013. Amendments to the list in the Annex to Council Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005 of the persons and entities subject to the regulations on the freezing of assets have been made on an ongoing basis through the Commission implementing regulations (EU) Nos 7/2012, 1251/2012 and 53/2013 in accordance with the decisions of the Sanctions Committee.

Link:

Sweden DRC sanctions page

 

Newport Beach, CA in February – and it’s work related!

No, I'm not going to BIS' 9th Annual Export Control Forum on February 24 and 25 – but you could! It's on the Events page now.

Here's the tentative agenda:

Agenda – Day One: February 24, 2014

8:30 AM – 5:00 PM, Reception from 5:00 PM – 7:00 PM

Conference Keynote: Eric Hirschhorn, Under Secretary for Industry and Security

Interagency Views on Export Control

Regulatory Update

Embargoes and Sanctions: Recent Developments

Census Regulatory Update and Export Documentation

Export Compliance Reviews

Reception

Agenda – Day Two: February 25, 2014

8:30 AM – 12:00 PM

Export Enforcement Keynote: David Mills, Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement

Export Enforcement Panel

Wrap-up Panel with Open Q&A

 

 

OFAC Releases TSRA Licensing Reports for Q2 and Q3 2013

The TSRA is the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000. OFAC processes license applications under this act to permit the export of agricultural commodities, medicine and medical devices to Iran and Sudan.

Links:

OFAC Notice

Q2 2013 Licensing Report

Q3 2013 Licensing Report

 

OFAC Fines Bank of Moscow $9,492,525

There were 69 non-egregious, non-self-disclosed violations of the WMD Regulations and Executive Order 13382, with a base penalty of $14,063,000. In 2008 and 2009, these transfers, totalling $41,306,113, were sent to Bank Melli Iran ZAO through SWIFT. Instead of references to Melli, Iran or the bank's SWIFT code, Bank of Moscow used abbreviations like”BMI CJSC”. All these payments went straight-through US banks without manual intervention.

Here is OFAC's recitation of why the penalty ended up where it did:

OFAC considered the following to be mitigating factors:

  • Bank ofMoscow has not received a penalty notice or Finding of Violation from OFAC in the five yearspreceding the earliest date of the transactions giving rise to the alleged violations;
  • Bank ofMoscow took remedial action to improve compliance with U.S. sanctions laws and regulations;and
  • Bank of Moscow cooperated with OFAC’s investigation by signing a statute of limitationstolling agreement.

OFAC found the following to be aggravating factors in this case:

  • Bank ofMoscow failed to exercise an appropriate degree of caution or care in avoiding the conduct thatled to the alleged violations;
  • Bank of Moscow’s conduct resulted in significant harm to U.S.sanctions program objectives;
  • Bank of Moscow is a large and commercially sophisticatedfinancial institution; and
  • Bank of Moscow does not appear to have had adequate compliancepolicies or procedures in place at the time the alleged violations occurred.

This enforcementaction highlights the particular sanctions risk faced by foreign financial institutions that maintain accounts for persons subject to OFAC sanctions and conduct significant business through theU.S. financial system.

Link:

OFAC Enforcement Information