On Wednesday, the EU’s European Commission proposed to make breaking EU sanctions on Russia a crime, which would make it easier for the bloc to confiscate assets of people and companies that evade sanctions.
“Today’s proposals aim to ensure that the assets of individuals and entities that violate the restrictive measures can be effectively confiscated in the future,” the European Commission said in a statement.
Confiscating assets means they can be taken, sold, and used by the EU as opposed to freezing them, which only denies the targeted person access to their assets.
Breaking Russia sanctions is currently a crime in 12 EU nations. In 13 EU countries, it is either a criminal offense or an administrative offense, and two EU members only consider it an administrative offense.
Wednesday’s proposal would make evading Russia sanctions a serious criminal offense in all 27 EU countries. It would mean the EU could confiscate the assets of anyone who helped facilitate the skirting of sanctions, including lawyers and bankers.
The EU is also considering selling off the assets of already-sanctioned individuals, including Russian billionaires, to use the funds for Ukraine. President Biden is looking for similar power, but the federal government seizing private property without due process is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.
15 thoughts on “EU Proposes to Make Breaking Russia Sanctions a Crime”
Dear EU hopefully Russia will cut off your entire energy, food, raw material, and electrical supplies soon.
Why bomb you back to the stone age when they can just starve you and your economy back to the stone age.
And allow them to freeze, too. Gets cold in Europe.
Seeing the wonderful peaceful and democratic nature of Ursula von der crazy, Josep Borrell, Charles Michel and their unelected comrades warms the hearts of us “winners” of the West.
Ursula’s grandfather was in Ukraine leading SS efforts to track and kill resistance. She must sympathize with fellow Ukrainians figting for the ssme cause.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/25/ukraine-sidelines-regional-not-global-conflict-00034793 This is a good explanation of why the US isn’t gaining converts to its anti-Russia cause
Taking of assets of persons, without warrant, without a crime being committed by those persons is theft, pure and simple.
I am marketing a new line of toilet paper, it is blue and yellow 🇺🇦.
It expresses disdain for Zelensky and his Nazi hordes. All proceeds will go to those injured and killed by the Azov Nazis.
Put me down for a few cases, CT.
Yawn. You’ve posted this on at least three different articles and it isn’t any funnier the third time.
Got some with a picture of Biden every sheet?
You would naturually reject this as it is Totalitarianism. You have to destroy
villagethe advantages of an Economic union in order to save it.
I have no idea what terminoligy means any more.
There seem to be just too much confusion.
First, there are different systems on the basis of their values.
1. Hegemony — US wants to be global hegemon, a nice name for global
2. Priviledged clients of the Hegemon. Such are key countries of EU, Japan, South Korea, UK, Australalia-New Zealand and Canada.
3. Cients/colonies without influence. Those thst consistently vote in UN what hegemon ot priviledged clients want. Elite receives money for obedience.
4. Challengers to hegemony — Russia and China
5. Institutional suoport for Challengers — Organizatiins led by Chlengers — SCO, EAEU, CISTO, BRICS — continue engaging hegemon without ceding independence. Most notable examples India, Turkey, Brazil, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran
5. Hegemon’s tsrgets relying on Challegers to stay allive — Hungary. Mexico, Argentina, Serbia, North Korea, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Myanmar,
Ethiopia, Erithrea, Sudan
6. Occupied fully or partially by the hegemon — Iraq, Syria, Somalia.
Among clients — there is a leaning towards challengers lately. The absence of condemning Russia or sanctioning Russia even though they voted against Russia in UN (ASEAN countries.
As for the METHODS of governance:
There are autocracies, dictatorships. feudal/clan governance, plutocracy and anarchy. There is no demicracy anywhere. If by democracy we mean the rule in national interest — these characteristics are more often found in autocracies.
So. in order.
Autocracy is the rule based on the social perception of officials baving the requisite competence. Thus authority to rule. At the root it is an approval/disapproval of merits to rule. Sometimes combined with voter opportunty to approve. Militart, business, finance have a role to play, but do not usurp the role of meritocracy, and national interest. Fronted by leaders and bureaucracy.
Plutocracy is the rule by most powerful interests. Their representatives are institutions and politicians that get electec by auditioning for the part in frint of oligarch, while proving that they are capable of garnering votes so plutocrats agenda can be implemented. Bureaucracy is safeguarding plutocrats interests, even if occassionslly the audition process brings sn undesirable to the office.
Feudal/clan rule ix tradition based trust system, be it inherited or selected by a clan based consensus.
Dictatorships are all colonial administrations. Change of personities in power is at the convenience of the colonial master. Dictatorships are also a bylroduct of external threats, occupation or internal instability. It is a means of mobilizing or preventing anarchy, or fullfiling orders from the occupier.
Anarchies come in various shapes. Some are failed states, some are unstable and the veneer of statehood hides perenial power struggle.
EU is interesting. It is a classical trans-national plutocracy fronted by an unelected dictatorhip. Over time via dictstorial powers they bribe through funding the elites in individual countries. Many European countries today ressemble Caribbean colonies. They are bought and scripted. Some are still not quite under control.
EU Proposes to Make EU a Crime
Comments are closed.