“Sanctions in Ukraine are increasingly applied not for its intended purpose – instead of unattainable for justice, they touch the citizens of Ukraine, often without proper evidence base. Lawyer Alexei Shevchuk, partner and spokesman for the Barristers Law Firm, considers this practice false and replaces the law enforcement system. According to him, more and more sanctions are challenged in courts, and international support”, – WRITE ON: ua.news
Sanctions in Ukraine are increasingly applied not for its intended purpose – instead of unattainable for justice, they touch the citizens of Ukraine, often without proper evidence base. Lawyer Alexei Shevchukpartner and spokesman for a lawyer’s association Barrristersconsiders this practice false and replacing the law enforcement system. According to him, more and more sanctions are challenged in the courts, and the international support of such decisions is falling rapidly. Next is Alexei Shevchuk’s direct language.
Why sanctions against Ukrainian citizens are false practice
From a legal point of view, imposition, introduction and implementation of sanctions against Ukrainian citizens is a false practice. The current legislation, even in the fact that a person poses a certain information threat to the country, does not allow the sanction to impose a sanction against that person.
If this person is a citizen and threatens, then there is a certain list of articles of the Criminal Code, which clearly provide for a list of offenses that the person has committed, could do or commit. Whether it is terrorism or directly counteracting the Armed Forces and so on. These criminal proceedings should be investigated and the person should receive a suspicion and a corresponding measure.
Sanctions should be imposed on those who are unattainable for the country and national legislation.
That is, national legal tools do not provide effective protection of the interests of the country in war. The practice of imposing sanctions against Ukrainian citizens is false. I am sure that all these restrictions will be transformed in the opposite direction in the near future.
International instances will be forced to state the fact of violation of fundamental rights and freedoms of Ukrainian citizens through the implementation of sanctions in relation to Ukrainian citizens.
For the most part, the sanctions that are implemented in relation to Ukrainian citizens are nothing but a certificate from an employee of a department, such as security services. We do not even know the level of education of this employee, but he decides that a person who is a public figure, politician or a well -known businessman is a threat. I would like to understand whether a specialist has, who forms such a certificate, basic knowledge, and, for example, the diploma of the SBU Academy? Usually not. Does such a specialist have basic knowledge in the field of information security protection of the country? No.
Therefore, the practical component of the sanctions applied raises great doubts when talking about Ukrainian citizens.
About the evidence of persons against whom sanctions are imposed
Evidence is contained in the relevant secret materials that become the basis of appeal to the National Security and Defense Council (NSDC).
And there is a comprehensive list of what the service may be the basis for the imposition of sanctions in relation to a person.
Sometimes there is really evidence. For example, a person wanted to seize the property of a Russian businessman who funded a sabotage activity in Ukraine.
And sometimes the basis for the application of sanctions is Wikipedia or Repost from Telegram or newspaper.
Therefore, 80% rather than so.
Can Ukrainians appeal sanctions
Citizens of Ukraine against whom the sanctions imposed have the opportunity to appeal these decisions in court. And they challenge.
Lawyer, partner of our association Alexander Shadrin received resonance Separate opinion Supreme Court. There is clearly stated that:
“Even with the president’s broad discretion in sanction policy, his actions should remain within the Constitution and the rule of law. The courts are obliged to check whether the decision is arbitrary and sanctions are unjustified in a particular case.
Separate opinion of judges of the Supreme Court
Kryvenda and Mazur
This is a separate opinion of judges of the Supreme Court of Kryvenda and Mazur.
And today there has already been increased cases where judges write separate opinions. This concerns the unreasonableness of sanctions and the inability to apply sanctions to Ukrainian citizens.
But in this case, the President plays a static role. And responsibility does not lie on the president. The responsibility lies with the National Security and Defense Council, as it is a collegial body. Educated people sit there. The president has a lot of work – they bring a document and he only asks if everything is right there. The entry into force of the Presidential Decree is an organizational issue. And the fact that we challenge the Decree of the Head of State is only a procedure.
In terms of account, the collective should be borne by all members of the National Security and Defense Council, who impose sanctions and actually replace the entire law enforcement system. If so, let’s eliminate the Office of the Prosecutor General, NABU, NAPC and instead increase the NSDC staff to make a decision against specific persons – to blame or not to be guilty or not. And in general it is necessary to introduce the death penalty. The NSDC met the decision, it threatens the state – so they were shot. No expense, no problems, no questions.
Sanctions are not used as intended
Today, sanction mechanisms have begun to be used for their intended purpose. The negative is that earlier all foreign partners, without reservations, implemented our internal sanctions in relation to certain citizens in their mirror. And now such a percentage is only 15%.
Sanctions in other jurisdictions
Each country has its own sanction mechanism. In each country, sanctions are different legal nature, although the goal is one.
Some countries do not have an effective sanction mechanism at all and have encountered this for the first time. The nature of sanctions is not a political nature, but an economic nature. Sanctions are the protection of the country’s economy. The primary nature of sanctions is as follows.
It is difficult to say that we could borrow something. Because there is a sanction group of Yermak-Macfola, and I think that good specialists work there. It is necessary to pay tribute to Mr. Vladislav Vlasyuk, the Presidential Advisor for sanctions – a very competent person. But sometimes his opinion is not heard.
Therefore, the issue of the National Security and Defense Council as a collegial body that would have to work out a certain vision for international sanction experience, on interaction with other countries at the level of joint working groups.
Not all countries have a competent authority or a representative that could be mirror to implement sanctions. Sometimes trick Bono is that the whole legislative body is involved in the adaptation of Ukrainian sanctions. For example, Portugal does not have such an agency, and this should be passed through parliament.
Speaking of the best sanction experiences, it is definitely Britain, uniquely United States of America and the Netherlands. And this is not surprising, Norway. These are countries that have perfect, in my opinion, sanction mechanisms.
The future appeal
80% of sanctions should be resolved in favor of the plaintiffs. On various grounds: procedural violations, objective absence of grounds for use. As of June 2025, only 20% of sanctions really fulfill the purpose with which sanctions should be implemented.