43
GLOBAL MAGNITSKY ACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER FOREIGN POLICY TEAM, HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST

GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

GLOBALMAGNITSKY ACTTARGETEDSANCTIONSPRIMER

FOREIGNPOLICYTEAM,HUMANRIGHTSFIRST

Page 2: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PRESENTATIONROADMAPI. Aboutus

II. Sanctionsoverview

III. GlobalMagnitskyoverview

IV. UpdateonUSgovernmentengagementtodate

V. Whatwedo

VI. Howwedoit

VII. Gettinginvolved

VIII. Q&A

Page 3: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTI:INTRODUCTION

Page 4: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based
Page 5: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTII:SANCTIONSOVERVIEW

Page 6: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PURPOSEOFSANCTIONS

• Provideleveragetodiplomaticandpoliticalprocessesthatcanbringaboutsustainablesolutionsby:• Namingandshaming• Changingaperpetrator’scalculustoeffectreductioninundesirablebehavior• Alienatingperpetratorsfromothergovernmentandnon-governmentactors• Signalinginternationalexpectations• Inducingeconomicshortfallstoreducerepressivecapacity

Page 7: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

TYPESOFSANCTIONS

Sectoral

TargetedSecondary

Comprehensive

Page 8: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

OTHERKEYCONCEPTSTOBEAWAREOF

• Unilateralvsmultilateralsanctions

• Legalstandards(bothnationalandinternational)

• Reportingrequirements

• Sunsetprovisions

Page 9: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTIII:GLOBALMAGNITSKYACTOVERVIEW

Page 10: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

AMERICANHRSANCTIONSPRE-MAGNITSKY

IEEPA INA

&

Page 11: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

THEMAGNITSKYACT(2012)

• SergeiMagnitsky(1972-2009)

• TheactappliestopersonsinvolvedineithercrimesagainstMr.MagnitskyorothergrosshumanrightsviolationsinRussia

• Mandatoryifevidentiarythresholdcrossed

• Penaltiesare:• INA-basedvisasanctions• IEEPA-basedeconomicsanctions

Page 12: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

THEGLOBALMAGNITSKYACT(2016)

• Inshort:globalexpansionofMagnitskyAct’stargetedsanctionpower

• TheGlobalMagnitskyActallows(butdoesnotrequire)thePresidenttoblockorrevokeU.S.visasandtoblockallUS-basedpropertyandinterestsinpropertyofforeignpersons(bothindividualsandentities)whohaveengagedin:• a)extrajudicialkillings,torture,orothergrossviolationsofhuman

rights againstindividualswhoeitherseek“toexposeillegalactivitycarriedoutbygovernmentofficials”or“toobtain,exercise,defend,orpromoteinternationallyrecognizedhumanrightsandfreedoms”• b)actsofsignificantcorruptionbygovernmentofficials.Individualswho

haveactedasagentsoforonbehalfofhumanrightsabusersorwhohavemateriallyassistedcorruptofficialscanalsobesanctioned.

Page 13: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

EXECUTIVEORDER13818(DEC.2017)

• SignificantlyexpandedthescopeofsanctionablecrimesundertheGMA,IEEPA,andINA

• DelegatedfurtherdesignationstotheSecretaryofTreasuryinconsultationwiththeSecretaryofState

• Annexdesignated15personsand37entities

Page 14: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

EXPANDEDPOWERSGlobalMagnitskyasenacted EO13818asapplied

“grossviolations ofinternationallyrecognizedhumanrights”

“serioushumanrightsabuse”(non-stateactors)

perpetratedagainstsomeoneworkingto“obtain,exercise,defend,orpromote”humanrights

perpetratedbyanyforeignpersonfound“toberesponsiblefororcomplicitin,ortohavedirectlyorindirectlyengagedin,serioushumanrightsabuse.”

commandresponsibility(activity-based) “leaderorofficialofanentitythathasengagedin…”(status-based)

“actsofsignificantcorruption” “corruption”

“thefacilitationortransferoftheproceedsofcorruption”onlyapplytotransferstoforeignjurisdictions

Norestrictiononapplicationregardingfacilitationortransferofcorrupt proceeds

Page 15: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

WHATCONSTITUTES“SERIOUSHUMANRIGHTSABUSE”?• NotatermcodifiedinUSlaw,butpresumptivelyexpandslegalstandardof“gross

violationsofinternationallyrecognizedhumanrights”(GVHR)tonon-stateactors

• GHVRlegalstandardincludes:• Torture• Cruel,inhuman,ordegradingtreatmentorpunishment• Prolongeddetentionwithoutchargesandtrial• Causingthedisappearanceofpersonsbytheirabductionandclandestine

detention• Otherflagrantdenialsoftherighttolife,liberty,orthesecurityoftheperson

• Ingeneral,undertheMagnitskyAct,theUSGhaslimitedactiontothecrimesofextrajudicialkilling,rape,torture,orenforceddisappearance,andmayactoncasesofpoliticallymotivatedimprisonment

Page 16: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

WHATCONSTITUTES“CORRUPTION”?

• Broadconstruction

• Explicitlyincludes:• Misappropriationofstateassets• Expropriationofprivateassetsforpersonal

gain• Corruptionrelatedtogovernmentcontracts

orextractionofnaturalresources• Bribery• Transferorfacilitationoftransferof

proceedsfromcorruption

Page 17: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTIV:USGOVERNMENTENGAGEMENTTODATE

Page 18: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

EXECUTIVEBRANCHENGAGEMENT

•113 designationsmadesinceJanuary2017(asofSeptember2019)

•9 rounds

•19 countries

Page 19: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

BREAKDOWNOFSANCTIONSTODATE

IndividualPrimarySanctions 46EntityPrimarySanctions 2IndividualDerivativeSanctions 5EntityDerivativeSanctions 60TotalSanctions 113

HumanRightsAbuse 36Corruption 64Both 13

SanctionsbyType

SanctionsbyCrime

12/21/2017 526/12/2018 76/15/2018 147/5/2018 38/1/2018 2*8/17/2018 611/15/2018 175/17/2019 87/18/2019 4

TotalBatches 9*=Rescinded

SanctionsbyBatch

Page 20: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

SANCTIONSTRACKER

Significantdiversityinsanctionsthusfar

Differentcountries:19Continents:Africa,Asia,Europe,NorthAmerica

Number DesignationDate Primary? Derivative Crime Country Name Type Title

1 12/21/2017 Yes N/A HRAbuse Guatemala JulioAntonio(Juarez)Ramirez Individual Congressman

2 12/21/2017 Yes N/A Corruption Uzbekistan GulnaraKarimova Individual DaughterofformerleaderKarimov

3 12/21/2017 Yes N/A HRAbuse China GaoYan Individual FormerChaoyangBranchDirector,BeijingPublicSecurityBureau

4 12/21/2017 Yes N/A HRAbuse Myanmar MaungMaungSoe Individual FormerChief,ArmyWesternCommand

5 12/21/2017 Yes N/A HRAbuse Ukraine SergeyKusiuk Individual FormerCommander,Berkut

6 12/21/2017 Yes N/A Corruption Dom.Rep. Angel(Rondon)Rijo Individual Odebrechtlobbiest

7 12/21/2017 Yes N/A Corruption Nicaragua RobertoJose(Rivas)Reyes Individual President,SupremeElectoralCouncil

8 12/21/2017 Yes N/A Corruption Russia ArtemChayka Individual SonofProsecutorGeneral

9 12/21/2017 Yes N/A HRAbuse Pakistan MukhtarHamidShah Individual Surgeon;organtrafficker

10 12/21/2017 Yes BolMel Corruption SouthSudan Benjamin(BolMel) Individual President,ABMCThai-SouthSudanConstructionCompany

11 12/21/2017 No BolMel Corruption SouthSudan ABMCThai-SouthSudanConstructionCompany Entity BolMelDerivative

12 12/21/2017 No BolMel Corruption SouthSudan HomeandAwayLTD Entity BolMelDerivative

13 12/21/2017 Yes Gertler Corruption Israel DanGertler Individual Executive,oilandmining

14 12/21/2017 No Gertler Corruption DRC PieterAlbertDeboutte Individual Director,MokuGoldminesAG

Page 21: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

CONGRESSIONALENGAGEMENT

• “Indeterminingwhethertoimposesanctionsundersubsection(a),thePresidentshallconsider…informationprovidedjointlybythechairpersonandrankingmemberofeachoftheappropriatecongressionalcommittees”• MembersofCongresshaveactedthroughbothpublicandprivate

recommendations• Sincepassageofthelaw,15openlettershavebeensenttothe

ExecutiveBranchrequestingthereviewandsanctioningofspecificindividuals/entities• Manylettershavebeenbipartisan,demonstratingtheuniquely

powerfulnatureofGlobalMagnitskyinthecurrentUSpoliticalclimatevis-à-vishumanrights

Page 22: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTV:CIVILSOCIETYINVOLVEMENT

Page 23: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

NGOSAREGRANTEDINVOLVEMENTINGLOBALMAGNITSKY ACTIMPLEMENTATION

“(c) CONSIDERATION OF CERTAININFORMATION IN IMPOSING SANCTIONS.—Indeterminingwhethertoimposesanctionsundersubsection(a),thePresidentshallconsider—

• (1)informationprovidedbythechairpersonandrankingmemberofeachoftheappropriatecongressionalcommittees;and

• (2)credibleinformationobtainedbyothercountriesandnongovernmentalorganizationsthatmonitorviolationsofhumanrights.”

Page 24: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

HRFANDPARTNERSWORKINGTOMAKETHEMOSTOFTHISGUARANTEE

• BuildingandexpandingadiversecoalitionofNGOandprobonolegalpartners

• EngagingwithactorsacrosstheU.S.Government:• TreasuryDepartmentandStateDepartment• HouseForeignAffairsandSenateForeignRelations

• Authoringcasefilesandadvocatingforspecificactions

• MonitoringuseofGlobalMagnitskysanctionsbyUSG

Page 25: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

DUALBENEFITSOFRIGOROUSNGOINVOLVEMENTNGOscansupportresponsibleandeffectiveuseofthesanctionpower:

• Facilitateincreaseddesignationsthroughresearchandadvocacy

• Penalizeperpetratorsofhumanrightsabusesandcorruptactsaroundtheworld,promptingreform

• BolsterU.S.commitmenttohumanrightsbothathomeandabroad

• Encourageothercountriestoadoptsimilarstandardsandenactmorepowerfulmultilateralsanctions

NGOscanbemoreeffectivewatchdogsagainstabuseofthesanctionpower:

• UnderstandbettertheinternalfactorstheUSGconsiderswhenmakingdesignations

• HoldUSGaccountableforpolitical,short-sighted,orhypocriticalexerciseofsanctions

• ReviewsanctionsforeffectivenessandpromotechangestospecificdesignationsaswellasGlobalMagnitskyprogram,asappropriate

Page 26: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTVI:OURPROCESS

Page 27: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

10STEPSFOREFFECTIVESANCTIONSRECOMMENDATIONS1) Identifyareaofinterestandpeople/entitiesofconcern

2) Studyandcollectextantresearchonspecificabuses

3) Performadditionalresearch(ifrequired),ideallyteamingwithlocalNGOs

4) ResearchU.S.governmentinterestrelevanttosanctioningoftarget

5) Followcasetemplatetocreateacasefileoutoftheevidence

6) Consultprobonocounseltoimprovelegalstrengthofcasefile

7) Reviewforaccuracyandsufficiency

8) SubmittotheState&TreasuryDepartments,ideallyinanin-personmeeting,aswellastoembassy

9) Sendcopiestorelevantcongressionalstaffandrequestmembersupport

10) Use8&9tobuildrelationshipsanddialogue

Page 28: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

1)IDENTIFYAREAOFINTERESTANDPEOPLE/ENTITIESOFCONCERN

• Contentexpertise?• HRAbuse,corruption,orboth?

• Geographicexpertise?• Specificcountry,region,etc.?

• Identifywho• USGinterestedindiplomatic,financialimpact

• Identifywhy• USGseesGMAasbehavior-altering,sofocuseson

ongoinginstancesofabuse/corruption• Casemorethan5yearsold,USGnotinterested

Page 29: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

2)STUDYANDCOLLECTEXTANTRESEARCHONSPECIFICABUSES

InternetSearch

UNFindings(Spec.Rapp.)

Local&NationalGov’tInvestigations

LocalNGOs&Researchers

Local&National

News

INGOReportsInt’lNewsReporting

ForeignGov’tStatements

(includingUS)

Page 30: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

3)PERFORMADDITIONALRESEARCH(IFREQUIRED),IDEALLYTEAMINGWITHLOCALNGOS

• Ifcombiningotherresearchisinsufficient,domoredigging• Don’tneedtoproveperson’severyoffense,justenoughseriousHRabusesand/orcorrupt

actstojustifydesignation

• ResearchshouldinformastolocalNGOs,journalists,witnesses,andvictimsthatcouldbecontactedforadditionalinformation• ConfidentialitycanbeCRITICAL,verifywithlocalcontactsbefore,during,andafter• NOTE:USGtreatsallsubmissionsasconfidential

• Barringconfidentialityconcerns,opportunitytoraisetheprofileofwiththeUSGofNGOsthathavelittletonocontactwithUS

Page 31: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

4)RESEARCHU.S.GOVERNMENTNATIONALINTERESTRELEVANTTOSANCTIONINGOFTARGET• Realistically,politicalconsiderationsareanimportantfactorinsanctioning

Nationalinterestprosofsanctioning Nationalinterestconsofsanctioning

Creatediplomaticleverage Endangerchancesformoreamicablerelations

Supportlesscorruption/abusivefactionswithinforeigngovernments

Threatscausesometoretreatfromthebargainingtableandentrench

Underminecompetitorstates OpenUStocriticismsofhypocrisy

ImproveUSstandingasaleaderinhumanrightsandruleoflaw

Page 32: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

5)FOLLOWCASETEMPLATETOCREATEACASEFILEOUTOFTHEEVIDENCE

ModelcasetemplatedevelopedbasedonconsultationwithUSGandpastexperience

6-partcasefile:1) PerpetratorInformation2) ImpactSummary3) CaseType4) Evidence5) ApplicableLaw6) ContraryEvidence/Arguments

***SAMPLE TEXT*** Full Legal Name of Perpetrator: Colonel John Smith Country: Generica Title or Position: Director-General of Ministry of Security (since July 2016); former Director of the Directorate of Criminal Interrogation (2015) Date of Birth: 12/14/1971

Other Known Personal Identifiers (passport number, address, etc): located in Metropolis, Central Province; Passport 66666666; Generica identification number 3333333

Page 33: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

6)CONSULTPROBONOCOUNSELTOIMPROVELEGALSTRENGTHOFCASEFILE

• Consultlegalcounselfamiliarwithsanctioningregardingevidenceandtheapplicabilityofsanctionlaw(parts4-6ofthemodelcasefile)

• Standardofproof:“reasontobelieve”“basedoncredibleinformation”

• Note:Eachpieceofevidencemustbecorroboratedbymultiple,preferablyindependentsources

Page 34: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

7)REVIEWFORACCURACYANDSUFFICIENCYSeriousHumanRightsAbuseChecklist:1.WasthevictimsubjectedtoaSHRA?2.Cantheperpetrator(individualorentity)beconnected?3.Forcasesof“status-basedresponsibility,”canitbeshownthattheindividualwasanofficialengagedin,orwhosesubordinateswereengagedinSHRA?4.DidtheperpetratoreitherattemptormateriallyassistaSHRB?Asanctionedperson?ASHRBcommittingentity?5.Istheperpetratorownedorcontrolledbyasanctionedperson?6.Aretheperpetrator’spersonalidentifiersknown(ataminimum,fulllegalnameanddateofbirth)?

CorruptionChecklist:1.Istheperpetratoracurrentorformergovernmentofficialoraidresponsibleforcorruption?2.Forcasesof“status-basedresponsibility,”canitbeshownthattheindividualwasaleaderofacorruptgovernmententity?3.Didtheperpetratoreitherattemptormateriallyassistcorruption?Asanctionedperson?Acorruptentity?4.Istheperpetratorownedorcontrolledbyasanctionedperson?5.Aretheperpetrator’spersonalidentifiersknown(ataminimum,fulllegalnameanddateofbirth)?

Page 35: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

8)SUBMITTOTHESTATEANDTREASURYDEPARTMENTS,IDEALLYVIAANIN-PERSONMEETING,ASWELLASTOEMBASSY

• TheTreasuryDepartmentcontrolssanctionsthroughtheOfficeofForeignAssetControl(OFAC)

• TheStateDepartmentoverseesU.S.foreignrelations

• OFAChastwostandarddesignationcyclesperyear:onespringandonefall

• Planaheadtoscheduleameetingandpresenttherecommendationsacoupleofmonthsinadvancesothattheyhavetimetobeintegratedintothegeneralpoolforconsideration

• Uponsubmission,contacttherelevantin-countryembassyandpresenttheinformationtothemaswell

Page 36: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

9)SENDCOPIESTORELEVANTCONGRESSIONALSTAFF/OFFICIALSANDREQUESTTHEIRSUPPORT

• ManymembersofCongressareinterestedinGMAandsubmitrecommendationstotheExecutiveBranch

• PairinganNGOrecommendationwithancongressionalrecommendationcanonlyservetoincreasethelikelihoodthatitwillbegivenaseriousreview

• SomemembersofCongressaremorefocusedincertainareasoftheworld.DoingbackgroundresearchcanhelppinpointthebestCongressionalofficestotargetforcooperation.

Page 37: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

10)USE8&9TOBUILDRELATIONSHIPSANDDIALOGUE

Submitcases

BuildrelationshipsResearchnewcases

Page 38: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

PARTVI:OURCOALITION

Page 39: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

MEMBERSNGOBranch

160+Organizations

30+NGOsincountriesinAfrica,Asia,Europe,andNorthandSouthAmerica

25+INGOsworkingglobally

ProbonoBranch

Dozen-pluslawyers/firmsandgrowing

Page 40: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

RESULTSTODATESinceSeptember2017:

•180 uniquerecommendationssubmittedtoOFAC

• Receivedconsistentandrepeatedpositiveresponses

• Roughly15%ofrecommendationshavecontributedtosanctionsdeterminationswithmorecurrentlyunderreview

Page 41: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

JOININGTHECOALITION• Informal

• EachNGOsrecommendationsarepresentedastheirown

• Opportunitytolearnfromexperienceandexpertiseofothercoalitionmembers

• CoalitionleadersassistinsettingupWashington,D.C.,meetingsandattendtohelpfacilitatepresentationsandrelationshipbuilding

• Tojoin,simplyspeakwithHRFstaff

Page 42: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based

Q&A

Page 43: GLOBAL MAGNITSKYACT TARGETED SANCTIONS PRIMER · 1. Was the victim subjected to a SHRA? 2. Can the perpetrator (individual or entity) be connected? 3. For cases of “status-based