Legal positions of States and international organisations on the item “Elimination of unilateral extraterritorial coercive economic measures used as an instrument of political and economic compulsion”(1996-2024)

LEGAL POSITIONS OF STATES AND INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS ON THE ITEM “ELIMINATION OF UNILATERAL EXTRATERRITORIAL COERCIVE ECONOMIC MEASURES USED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC COMPULSION” (1996-2024) ARITZ OBREGÓN FERNÁNDEZ POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCHER UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY This documen has been p oduced hanks o he unding o he Basque Go e nmen 's Pos doc o al P og amme o he Imp o emen o Doc o al Resea ch Pe sonnel. Please ci e he documen as ollows: Ob egón-Fe nández, A i z, “Legal posi ions o S a es and in e na ional o ganiza ions on he subjec ‘Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es used as an ins umen o poli ical and economic compulsion’ (1996-2024)”, Labo a ó io de Di ei os Humanos da UFRJ, Ma ch 2025, h p://doi.o g/10.13140/RG.2.2.32820.97924. See he Spanish e sion in: Ob egón-Fe nández, A i z, “Posiciones ju ídicas de los Es ados y o ganizaciones in e nacionales en el ema ‘Eliminación de las medidas económicas coe ci i as unila e ales ex a e i o iales u ilizadas como ins umen o de coacción polí ica y económica’ (1996-2024)”, Labo a ó io de Di ei os Humanos da UFRJ, ma zo 2025, h p://doi.o g/10.13140/RG.2.2.19399.20643. TABLE OF CONTENTS PRESENTATION ........................................................................................................ 7 AFRICA ....................................................................................................................... 8 Alge ia ................................................................................................................ 8 Benin .................................................................................................................. 8 Bu kina Faso ...................................................................................................... 8 Bu undi .............................................................................................................. 9 Equa o ial Guinea .............................................................................................. 9 E i ea .............................................................................................................. 10 Eswa ini ........................................................................................................... 10 Ghana ............................................................................................................... 11 Libya ................................................................................................................. 11 Mali .................................................................................................................. 14 Namibia ............................................................................................................ 14 Senegal ............................................................................................................. 15 Sou h A ica ..................................................................................................... 15 Sudan ............................................................................................................... 16 Zimbabwe ......................................................................................................... 17 ASIA-PACIFIC .......................................................................................................... 18 China ................................................................................................................ 18 Cyp us .............................................................................................................. 19 Democ a ic People's Republic o Ko ea ............................................................ 20 Indonesia .......................................................................................................... 21 I an ................................................................................................................... 21 I aq ................................................................................................................... 26 Japan ................................................................................................................ 28 Jo dan .............................................................................................................. 29 Lao People's Democ a ic Republic ................................................................... 29 Malaysia ........................................................................................................... 30 Nau u ............................................................................................................... 31 Qa a ................................................................................................................ 31 S a e o Pales ine ............................................................................................. 32 Sy ian A ab Republic ....................................................................................... 33 Timo -Les e ...................................................................................................... 34 Yemen ............................................................................................................... 35 EASTERN EUROPE ................................................................................................. 36 A menia ............................................................................................................ 36 Bela us ............................................................................................................. 36 Bosnia and He zego ina .................................................................................. 36 Bulga ia ............................................................................................................ 38 Czechia ............................................................................................................. 39 Es onia ............................................................................................................. 40 Geo gia ............................................................................................................. 41 Hunga y ........................................................................................................... 42 La ia ............................................................................................................... 44 Li huania .......................................................................................................... 45 Mon eneg o ...................................................................................................... 46 Poland............................................................................................................... 48 Republic o Moldo a ......................................................................................... 48 Romania ........................................................................................................... 50 Russian Fede a ion .......................................................................................... 51 Slo akia ............................................................................................................ 52 Slo enia ............................................................................................................ 54 Uk aine ............................................................................................................ 55 LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN ............................................................ 58 A gen ina ......................................................................................................... 58 Boli ia .............................................................................................................. 58 B azil ................................................................................................................ 59 Colombia ........................................................................................................... 59 Cuba ................................................................................................................. 60 Ecuado ............................................................................................................ 63 Hondu as .......................................................................................................... 63 Jamaica ............................................................................................................ 64 Mexico .............................................................................................................. 64 Nica agua ......................................................................................................... 65 Sain Vincen and he G enadines .................................................................. 66 Venezuela ......................................................................................................... 67 WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHER STATES .................................................... 69 Aus alia .......................................................................................................... 69 Canada ............................................................................................................. 70 Iceland .............................................................................................................. 72 Liech ens ein .................................................................................................... 74 Mal a ................................................................................................................ 76 New Zealand .................................................................................................... 77 No way ............................................................................................................. 77 San Ma ino ....................................................................................................... 80 Tü kiye ............................................................................................................. 80 Uni ed Kingdom o G ea B i ain and No he n I eland ............................... 80 Uni ed S a es o Ame ica ................................................................................. 81 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND GROUPS OF STATES ..................... 84 Eu opean Union (EU) ...................................................................................... 84 G oup o 77 and China ................................................................................... 87 G oup o A ican S a es ......................................................................................... 88 G oup o F iends in De ense o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions ..................... 90 League o A ab S a es ..................................................................................... 91 Non-Aligned Mo emen (NAM) ....................................................................... 92 O ganiza ion o Islamic Coope a ion (OIC) ..................................................... 95 Sou he n A ican De elopmen Communi y (SACD) ..................................... 95 PRESENTATION This pape is one in a se ies o epo s aimed a cla i ying bo h he s a e p ac ice and opinio iu is on he possible c ea ion o exis ence o a ule on he p ohibi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es, as well as i s hypo he ical con en . In pa icula , i p esen s he legal posi ions o S a es, g oups o S a es and in e na ional o ganiza ions exp essed ollowing he adop ion o he Gene al Assembly esolu ion on he ‘Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es used as an ins umen o poli ical and economic coe cion’ du ing he 51s , 55 h,57 h, 65 h and 78 h sessions o he Gene al Assembly (2002-2024). 1 A hese sessions, esolu ions we e adop ed wi h he ollowing numbe o o es: 2 Resolu ion In a ou Agains Abs en ion No o e A/RES/57/5, 27 No embe 1996 133 2 2 54 A/RES/55/6, 26 Oc obe 1998 136 2 10 41 A/RES/53/10, 26 Oc obe 2000 80 2 67 36 A/RES/51/22, 16 Oc obe 2002 56 4 76 49 As a as he s uc u e o he documen is conce ned, we ha e op ed o classi y he S a es’ posi ions acco ding o he dis ibu ion o UN geog aphical g oups and in alphabe ical o de . A e he S a es’ posi ions, he posi ions o he g oups o S a es and in e na ional o ganiza ions ha ha e exp essed hei posi ions ha e been included. In his sense, i should be no ed ha he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica and Tu key ha e been included in he “Wes e n Eu ope and o he S a es” g oup, and he S a e o Pales ine, a non-membe obse e , in he “Asia-Paci ic” g oup. In addi ion, he o icial Uni ed Na ions code has been used o e e ence he eco ds and documen s con aining he legal posi ions lis ed. Ma ch 2025 1 A e 14 yea s, he 78 h session o he Gene al Assembly ag eed -wi hou a o e- o aise he i em again and add ess a he nex session (A/RES/78/329). 2 The indi idual o es o each S a e can be consul ed in Ob egón-Fe nández, A i z, Vo ing eco d o he UNGA Resolu ions on “Elimina ion o unila e al and ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion”, Ma ch 2025, h p://doi.o g/10.13140/RG.2.2.29164.07043. A ica Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 8 AFRICA Alge ia 2024. “[…] The unila e al coe ci e economic measu es, such as economic sanc ions and ade emba goes, imposed on se e al de eloping coun ies unde mine he p inciples o he so e eign equali y o S a es and o non-in e en ion, as ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. These measu es es ic no only he ee low o ade and ha e a nega i e impac on popula ions by dep i ing hem o access o ood, medicine and o he essen ial goods and se ices, bu also cons i u e a iola ion o in e na ional law and he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . Alge ia exp esses i s suppo o all coun ies unde unila e al coe ci e measu es and i mly belie es ha i is c ucial o all coun ies o e ain om p omulga ing na ions […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 2-3) Benin 2000. “The Republic o Benin nei he ecognizes no applies any coe ci e economic measu e o law o an ex a e i o ial na u e unila e ally imposed by any S a e wha soe e ”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 2) Bu kina Faso 1998. “[…] As we know, sanc ions we e o iginally among he poli ical means o which S a es could eso in o de o make ecalci an membe s o he in e na ional communi y lis en o eason. Rele an in e na ional law has done e e y hing possible o inco po a e sanc ions in o he a senal o poli ical and legal coe ci e measu es. Howe e , since he ounding o he Uni ed Na ions, sanc ions ha e ended o be an excep ion among excep ions, in ha hey we e in ended o be used wi h g ea cau ion and disc e ion, as is he case wi h any weapon. This means ha hey should be used only once peace ul means, such as nego ia ion, media ion and concilia ion, ha e been exhaus ed. I is in his sense ha he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions clea ly spells ou in A icle 2, pa ag aph 3, ha : ‘All Membe s shall se le hei in e na ional dispu es by peace ul means in such a manne ha in e na ional peace and secu i y, and jus ice, a e no endange ed’. Bu i is p ecisely economic sanc ions ha a e mos unjus and he mos ha m ul, because o hei con agious e ec s and he insidious damage hey in lic . I a coun y canno o ou , i e o six yea s expo i s p oduc s o ob ain oods u s om ab oad, imagine he su e ing o he people o ha coun y. The pa adox is his: he ques o punish a S a e o a se ious ailing o o an o ence i has commi ed — in o he wo ds, because an injus ice has aken place — esul s in ano he injus ice: s a ing a popula ion ha , in e ms o he scale o esponsibili y, is comple ely innocen . He ein lies he iniqui y o economic coe cion. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 10-11) A ica 9 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) Bu undi 1996. “[…] Fi s , Bu undi is in p inciple agains any measu e ha unjus ly a ec s he popula ion o any S a e unde wha e e p e ex . Secondly, I should like o a ail mysel o his oppo uni y o emind he in e na ional communi y ha my coun y is su e ing om an inhuman, illegal and unjus economic blockade imposed by he neighbou ing S a es unde a p e ex in ol ing my coun y’s domes ic policies — a ques ion ha has al eady become nuga o y. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 24) Equa o ial Guinea 2024. “[…] E en hough S a es, egional o ganiza ions and in e na ional o ganiza ions, pa icula ly he Secu i y Council, a e able o adop sanc ions, pu suan o Chap e VII o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , such sanc ions mus be adop ed in s ic con o mi y wi h he obliga ions unde he ules o in e na ional law. They mus also be p opo iona e and ca e ully calib a ed. Only i hey a e concei ed o and applied in his way can hey se e as an impo an ool o use by he in e na ional communi y o s eng hen e o s o p e en , mi iga e and esol e long- s anding and eme ging global challenges. Ne e heless, ex a e i o ial unila e al coe ci e measu es, which we a e discussing in his deba e, ail o obse e e en he basic equi emen s o in e na ional law and do no espec ou p omise and common goal o lea ing no one behind. We he e o e ei e a e ou wholehea ed condemna ion o he adop ion, use and ecogni ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es by any S a e o g oup o S a es as a lag an iola ion o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional humani a ian law, in e na ional human igh s law and he no ms and p inciples go e ning iendly ela ions be ween coun ies. Such measu es con a ene he p inciples o so e eign equali y be ween S a es and o non-in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o S a es. They s and in he way o he ull enjoymen o human igh s, such as he igh o an adequa e s anda d o li ing. They wo sen he si ua ion o he mos ulne able g oups in socie y, especially women, child en and pe sons wi h disabili ies. They dis o ade and in es men lows and ha e a gene ally nega i e impac on in e na ional economic coope a ion and global e o s o mo e owa ds an open, anspa en , mul ila e al and non-disc imina o y ade sys em. They also p e en and limi he esolu ion o con lic s h ough peace ul dialogue and mu ual unde s anding. Unila e al coe ci e measu es a e used as an ins umen o exe poli ical, judicial, inancial, economic and o he kinds o p essu e on de eloping coun ies, o coe ce ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s and p omo e ce ain in e na ional poli ical in e es s. We suspec , in ac , ha he applica ion o ex a e i o ial coe ci e measu es is being seen as an al e na i e o mili a y o ce, jus wi hou he massi e su e ing and sac i ice equi ed by wa . Tha p emedi a ed and absu d p ac ice gi es an un ai ad an age A ica Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 16 2024. “[…] Sou h A ica app ecia es he con ening o oday’s much-needed deba e on he elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion. I would like o s a e unequi ocally ha my delega ion belie es ha unila e al ex a e i o ial economic measu es a e a iola ion o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional law and he pu poses and p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions. Today’s deba e comes a a ime when he e has been a no iceable inc ease in he scope, a ge s and ex a e i o ial na u e o unila e al coe ci e measu es. The illegali y o unila e al coe ci e measu es has been epea edly ea i med by he Human Righ s Council and he Gene al Assembly. Sou h A ica emains deeply conce ned abou he ex a e i o ial applica ion o laws and egula ions imposing unila e al coe ci e measu es, and u ges S a es o make use o mul ila e alism, diplomacy, nego ia ions, dialogue and o he peace ul ools o esol e di e ences wi hou eso ing o coe ci e measu es such as unila e al sanc ions. We ei e a e ha unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e ou solemn commi men , pledged in he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen , o lea e no one and no coun y behind. […] Today mo e han one in ou coun ies a e subjec o some kind o sanc ions, a ec ing a la ge segmen o he wo ld’s popula ion. […] Unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a lag an iola ion o human igh s. Such p ac ices a e con a y o he In e na ional Bill o Human Righ s, impac ing many igh s, including he igh o ood, employmen , educa ion and heal h. […] We would like o highligh he ca as ophic humani a ian impac o unila e al coe ci e measu es, which, in addi ion o po e y, nu i ional and heal h insecu i y, includes des oying essen ial public se ices, educa ional oppo uni ies o you h and he li elihoods o amilies and inc easing he isk o he igh o li e in sanc ioned coun ies. […] Finally, Sou h A ica ca ego ically ejec s he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es and calls on he sanc ioning coun ies o wi hd aw hem. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 25-26) Sudan 1998. “[…] A las session's deba e, i was demons a ed ha such coe ci e economic measu es a e illegal and ha hey un coun e o he mos undamen al p inciples o peace ul coexis ence and in e na ional economic coope a ion. They also con adic he in e na ional consensus on he need o a mo e open, non-disc imina o y wo ld ading sys em, and call in o ques ion he c edibili y o he noble s anda ds o us and he sup emacy o he ule o law, which a e impo an unde pinnings o in e na ional ela ions and o ela ions be ween S a es. […]. […] my delega ion ea i ms ha he use o such coe ci e economic measu es iola es he p inciple o non-in e en ion in he in e nal a ai s o S a es, hei na ional so e eign y, and hei poli ical and de elopmen choices based on hei own economic and cul u al c i e ia. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 7-8) A ica 17 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) 2000. “[…] The Go e nmen o he Sudan opposes he ex a e i o ial applica ion o domes ic laws. I opposes, in pa icula , unila e al ade measu es ha impose coe ci e penal ies and sanc ions, such as hose ha he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica is main aining agains he Sudan, he Libyan A ab Jamahi iya and o he coun ies o he pu pose o ad ancing i s own in e es s in a manne ha is o ally incompa ible wi h he p inciples o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional coope a ion. […] The Go e nmen o he Sudan is ully con iden ha , in con o mi y wi h he pu poses and p inciples embodied in i s Cha e , he Uni ed Na ions will ul il i s assigned ole in comba ing he unila e al ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional laws”. (A/55/300/Add.1, 28 Sep embe 2000, p. 1) 2024. “[…] he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e economic measu es and sanc ions is con a y o he p inciples o in e na ional law, he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and he p inciples go e ning iendly ela ions among coun ies. They unde mine he oppo uni ies o pa icipa e in and bene i om he in e na ional inancial sys em and in e na ional ade. […]. […] peace and de elopmen a e na u ally in e linked. Howe e , he applica ion o sanc ions has led o he ailu e o mee he needs o de eloping coun ies, especially wi h ega d o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals, and has dep i ed hem o he abili y o bene i om in e na ional inancial ins i u ions, in e na ional ade and inclusion in he in e na ional banking sys em. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 10-11) Zimbabwe 2024. “[…] The illegali y o he unila e al coe ci e measu es imposed by ce ain coun ies agains o he S a es, businesses and indi iduals has been well documen ed in nume ous Uni ed Na ions s udies. […] Despi e he clea will o he global majo i y o he o al elimina ion o such illegal measu es, se e al Wes e n coun ies con inue o impose hem wi h impuni y, ex ending hei unlaw ul e ec s bo h domes ically and ex a e i o ially. As a esul , ha coe ci e in e na ional o de is unde mining he unc ions, au ho i y and c edibili y o he Uni ed Na ions. E idence shows ha hose measu es cause g oss iola ions o human igh s, including he igh s o li e, ood, heal h, wa e and sani a ion. They hinde he implemen a ion o he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen , in addi ion o he esponse o pandemics such as he co ona i us disease pandemic and he p o ision o humani a ian assis ance in a ec ed coun ies. I is a allacy ha such measu es a e a ge ed in na u e. The eali y is ha hey ha e a spillo e con agion e ec on o he coun ies, in pa icula by imposing a blanke nega i e pe cep ion abou coun ies such as my own ac oss he wo ld, especially in sensi i e global inancial ma ke s, whe e he e is always o e compliance. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 9-10) Asia-Paci ic Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 18 ASIA-PACIFIC China 2024. “[…] Fi s , unila e al coe ci e measu es a e in lag an con a en ion o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law. The Uni ed S a es, oge he wi h a mino i y o o he S a es, wi hou au ho iza ion om he Secu i y Council, p oceeds on he basis o i s own p e e ences and decides o a bi a ily impose unila e al coe ci e measu es on o he S a es. Tha is an amoun o placing i s domes ic legisla ion abo e in e na ional law and he na ional legisla ion o o he S a es, challenging he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council, iola ing he p inciple o so e eign equali y and lou ing he pu poses and p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . The Uni ed S a es has e en gone as a as o push o so-called seconda y sanc ions, compelling he compliance o hi d S a es h ough i s unila e al coe ci e measu es. Tha amoun s o making wo se wha was al eady w ong in he i s place, he eby se iously unde mining he undamen al p inciples o in e na ional law and he in e na ional ule o law. Secondly, unila e al coe ci e measu es se iously impede he achie emen o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. The 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen emphasizes ha all coun ies should bene i equally om he di idends o de elopmen and u ges coun ies o e ain om p omulga ing and implemen ing unila e al economic, inancial o ade measu es ha a e con a y o he Cha e and in e na ional law. Howe e , a hand ul o coun ies, including he Uni ed S a es, ha e con inued o capi alize on hei hegemonic economic and inancial powe o equen ly impose unila e al sanc ions on o he coun ies, he eby se iously dis up ing no mal economic and ade coope a ion among he coun ies conce ned, g a ely h ea ening he s abili y o he global p oduc ion and supply chains, unde mining ood, ene gy and inancial secu i y, and se iously dis up ing he wo ld economic o de and he e o s o he coun ies conce ned o achie e he SDGs. Thi dly, he unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a c iminal ool used o in inge on he human igh s o o he coun ies. The Uni ed S a es and a ew o he S a es claim o p o ec human igh s, bu in eali y hey abuse unila e al coe ci e measu es o he se ious de imen o he igh s o li e, heal h, de elopmen and educa ion, among o he basic human igh s, o he people in he coun ies a ge ed. […] Fou hly, unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a majo d i e o wo sening humani a ian c ises in he coun ies conce ned. […] Fi hly and las ly, unila e al coe ci e measu es a e an acu e mani es a ion o hegemony and powe poli ics. The Uni ed S a es and hose ew o he S a es abuse hei powe o weaponize and ins umen alize unila e al sanc ions. The unde lying logic ha hey ollow is he law o he jungle, whe eby he s ong p ey on he weak. The ul ima e aim o hose measu es is o main ain hei monopolis ic hegemony and an unjus and un easonable in e na ional o de , in which he big bully he small, he s ong abuse he weak and he ich opp ess he poo . The unila e al coe ci e Asia-Paci ic 19 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) measu es equen ly imposed by he Uni ed S a es and he ew o he coun ies in hei o eign ela ions un coun e o he his o ical end o peace ul de elopmen and win-win coope a ion and a e incompa ible wi h he common calls o building a mul ipola wo ld, p ac icing mul ila e alism and upholding equi y and jus ice. Such ac ions agains he ide o his o y will ine i ably be swep away by i s i esis ible o ce. Fo a long ime, he in e na ional communi y has oiced i s consis en and s ong opposi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es. Since 1989, he Gene al Assembly has adop ed a esolu ion e e y wo yea s opposing unila e al economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic coe cion agains de eloping coun ies. Since 1992, he Assembly has adop ed a esolu ion e e y yea u ging he Uni ed S a es o end i s economic, comme cial and inancial emba go agains Cuba. And since 1997, i has adop ed a esolu ion e e y yea exp essing conce n abou he nega i e impac o unila e al coe ci e measu es on human igh s. We call on he Uni ed S a es and he ew o he S a es conce ned o heed he jus call o he in e na ional communi y and o ully and immedia ely abolish hei unila e al coe ci e measu es. We call on he Membe S a es, he Uni ed Na ions sys em and o he in e na ional o ganiza ions o p o ide suppo o coun ies unde sanc ions o help hem alle ia e hei ha dships. We call on he in e na ional communi y o pay close a en ion o he g a e consequences o such measu es and collec i ely esis hose illegal p ac ices. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 20-21) Cyp us 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o Asia-Paci ic Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 20 any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Democ a ic People's Republic o Ko ea 1998. “[…] Sanc ion measu es now being applied canno and should no be ole a ed, ei he in iew o hei pu pose, pu suing poli ical and economic p essu e, o o he unaccep able logical and legal g ounds used o jus i y hei applica ion and hei ca as ophic consequences. In his connec ion, he in e na ional communi y should pay se ious a en ion o he ques ion o upon whom and on wha g ounds he sanc ions a e imposed, and i should wo k ou a ai solu ion. In many ins ances, he a ge S a es o he sanc ions a e small S a es whose social sys ems and poli ical policies and posi ions a e alleged o be eason o sanc ions. I is bo h se ious and deplo able ha he si ua ion, which Asia-Paci ic 21 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) is cha ac e ized by coe ci e sanc ions and domina ion by powe , has been c ea ed as a esul o ex a e i o ial and a bi a y laws and ac s on he pa o ce ain big Powe s. The use o o cible means in pu sui o poli ical aims is a clea iola ion o he pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , he p inciples o in e na ional law, esolu ions o he Gene al Assembly and he decla a ions and p og ammes o ac ion o majo in e na ional con e ences […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 12-13) 2000. “[…] All o ms o unila e al coe ci e measu es con a y o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional laws and p ac ices should be elimina ed once and o all. […]”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 2) “The Go e nmen o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea has consis en ly opposed he imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions on a so e eign S a e. Imposing sanc ions on o he coun ies in pu sui o economic in e es s o o poli ical pu poses cons i u es a iola ion o he p inciples o espec o so e eign equali y and he igh o sel -de e mina ion embodied in he Uni ed Na ions Cha e and ele an Uni ed Na ions esolu ions. I also uns coun e o he p omo ion o iendly ela ions and he s eng hening o in e na ional coope a ion among Membe S a es”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 22) Indonesia 2024. “[…] Today he global communi y is acing challenges. The use o unila e al coe ci e measu es has no only unde mined in e na ional law and he mul ila e al sys em, bu has also demons a ed hypoc isy, double s anda ds and a widening us de ici and has b oken solida i y. We eg e ha coun ies a e o en p essu ed o ake sides and apply unila e al coe ci e measu es on issues no di ec ly ela ed o hem. Indonesia he e o e con inues o suppo e o s wi hin he Uni ed Na ions o call o he elimina ion o such measu es.. […]. […] he Uni ed Na ions mus pu sue ac ion on ma e s ha pu mul ila e alism a isk. Illegal sanc ions challenge he p inciples o dialogue, diplomacy and uni y, upon which mul ila e alism in he Uni ed Na ions is buil . […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-8) I an 1996. “[…] The impe missibili y unde in e na ional law o unila e al sanc ions is uni o mly ecognized by he in e na ional communi y. The adop ion o coe ci e economic measu es lies only wi hin he manda e o he Uni ed Na ions in pa icula si ua ions whe e he e exis s a h ea o peace o a b each o peace. Mo eo e , se e al ele an p inciples se o h in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions p o ide a solid basis o he O ganiza ion o o se he use o unila e al sanc ions by indi idual S a es. Acco ding o Gene al Assembly esolu ions, unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e he p inciples o non-in e en ion and non-in e e ence in he in e nal and ex e nal a ai s o o he S a es, as well as in he exe cise o he so e eign igh s o S a es. In Asia-Paci ic Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 22 his ega d, bo h he Decla a ion on he Inadmissibili y o In e e ence in he In e nal A ai s o S a es and he P o ec ion o hei Independence and So e eign y, adop ed on 21 Decembe 1965, and he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es, adop ed on 12 Decembe 1974, […]. The Decla a ion on he Inadmissibili y o In e en ion in he Domes ic A ai s o S a es and he P o ec ion o Thei Independence and So e eign y goes on o say ha such measu es also canno be used o “secu e ad an ages o any kind” om ano he S a es ( esolu ion 2131 (XX), pa a. 2) Fu he mo e, he Gene al Assembly has denounced on a ious occasions unila e al economic coe cion as a means o achie ing poli ical goals. Resolu ions en i led “Economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic coe cion agains de eloping coun ies”, adop ed a he o y- ou h and i ie h sessions o he Gene al Assembly, is a p ominen example o a se ies o Uni ed Na ions eac ions o such unlaw ul ac ions. The imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es and he app o al o domes ic legisla ion o he ho izon al escala ion o such ac ions wi h ex a e i o ial implica ions also con adic s es ablished in e na ional ade law, including he egula ions o he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, pp. 17-18) 1997. “[…]The exe cise o powe h ough he applica ion o illegal means such as unila e al ac ions and he imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es agains o he coun ies in o de o achie e unjus i iable objec i es is he p ominen example o an eme ging unila e alism ha is ex emely a ogan and sel -cen ed, ha eeds on hegemony and expansionism and ha en ails se ious in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o o he coun ies o he poin o sabo age and sub e sion. Impe missibili y o unila e al sanc ions unde in e na ional law is commonly ecognized by he in e na ional communi y. Unila e al ac ions and ex a e i o ial applica ion o domes ic laws se iously menace he in e na ional communi y’s e o s owa ds coope a ion in a ious a eas o peace and secu i y, de elopmen and en i onmen . Unde aking such measu es goes agains no only he pu poses and p inciples o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, bu also agains he p o isions o a la ge numbe o Uni ed Na ions esolu ions and o he ele an in e na ional ag eemen s. The spi i and le e o such esolu ions and in e na ional ag eemen s emphasize pa icula ly ha S a es should e ain om in e e ence and in e en ion in he in e nal a ai s o o he coun ies and om any a emp o impose hei policies on hem. Acco ding o hose esolu ions, unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e he p inciples o non-in e en ion, non-in e e ence in he in e nal and ex e nal a ai s o o he S a es and he exe cise o he so e eign igh o S a es. […] In e na ional ju isp udence agains such coe ci e measu es p o ides a solid base o he O ganiza ion o o se he exe cise o unila e al sanc ions by indi idual S a es. The imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es and he adop ion o domes ic laws o he ho izon al escala ion o such ac ions wi h ex a e i o ial implica ions also con adic he es ablished ules and egula ions o in e na ional ade law, including Asia-Paci ic 23 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) hose unde he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion. The e o e, unila e al coe ci e economic measu es unde mine he au ho i y and c edibili y o hose o ganiza ions ha a e legi ima ely conce ned abou his end in he conduc o in e na ional ela ions. […]”. (A/52/343, 15 Sep embe 1997, pp. 2-3) 1998. “[…] The impe missibili y unde in e na ional law o unila e al and ex a e i o ial sanc ions agains o he coun ies is uni o mly ecognized by he in e na ional communi y. The adop ion o coe ci e economic measu es alls wi hin he manda e o he Uni ed Na ions only in pa icula si ua ions whe e he e exis s a h ea o he peace o a b each o he peace. Mo eo e , se e al ele an p inciples se o h in he Cha e p o ide a solid basis o he O ganiza ion o o se he exe cise o unila e al sanc ions by indi idual S a es. Uni ed Na ions documen a ion agains unila e al ac ion is comp ehensi e. Acco ding o Gene al Assembly esolu ions, unila e al coe ci e measu es iola e he p inciples o non-in e en ion, non-in e e ence in he in e nal and ex e nal a ai s o o he S a es, and he exe cise by S a es o hei so e eign igh s. In his ega d, bo h pa ag aph 2 o he Decla a ion on he Inadmissibili y o In e en ion in he Domes ic A ai s o S a es and he P o ec ion o Thei Independence and So e eign y, esolu ion 2131 (XX) o 21 Decembe 1965, and a icle 32 o he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es, esolu ion 3281 (XXIX) o 12 Decembe 1974 […]. The imposi ion o coe ci e economic measu es and he enac men o domes ic legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial implica ions o he ho izon al escala ion o such ac ions and measu es also con adic p o isions o es ablished in e na ional ade law, including hose unde Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion (WTO) egula ions. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 8-10) 2000. “[…] The Membe S a es o he Uni ed Na ions, in adop ing hese esolu ions, ha e ejec ed he applica ion o ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es o legisla i e enac men s unila e ally imposed by any S a e. They ha e also called o he epeal o unila e al ex a e i o ial laws ha impose sanc ions on co po a ions and na ionals o o he S a es. P omulga ion and applica ion o laws o egula ions ha ha e ex a e i o ial e ec s o ha a ec he so e eign y o o he S a es and he legi ima e in e es s o en i ies o pe sons unde hei ju isdic ion — a clea iola ion o he uni e sally accep ed p inciples o in e na ional law — ha e been s ongly ejec ed on a ious occasions by he o e whelming majo i y o S a es. […] In hese imes o apid and unp eceden ed change, he wo ld needs peace, secu i y and s abili y, which could be s eng hened h ough collec i e esponsibili y o coun ies and also h ough, in e alia, espec o so e eign y, ejec ion o in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o o he S a es, e aining om compulsion and in imida ion, as well as c ea ion o an enabling en i onmen o eplacing con lic and unequal ela ions wi h dialogue and nego ia ions. […]”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, pp. 2-3) 2002. “[…] The Membe S a es, in adop ing hese esolu ions, ha e ejec ed he applica ion o ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es o legisla i e enac men s Asia-Paci ic Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 24 unila e ally imposed by any S a e. They ha e also called o he epeal o unila e al ex a e i o ial laws ha impose sanc ions on co po a ions and na ionals o o he S a es. P omulga ion and applica ion o laws o egula ions ha ha e ex a e i o ial e ec o ha a ec he so e eign y o o he S a es and he legi ima e in e es s o en i ies o pe sons unde hei ju isdic ion — a clea iola ion o he uni e sally accep ed p inciples o in e na ional law — has been s ongly ejec ed on a ious occasions by he o e whelming majo i y o S a es. […] En o cemen o unila e al coe ci e economic measu es, in de iance o he Cha e , has in lic ed g a e and i epa able losses, including a hea y inancial and human oll, on he a ge ed coun ies. To his e ec , he Islamic Republic o I an, as one o he a ec ed coun ies, ese es i s igh o pu sue i s inancial and in ellec ual claims and lodge i s complain agains Go e nmen s enac ing hose measu es, h ough he adop ion o conc e e ac ions. All coun ies should, in he ue spi i o mul ila e alism and since e obse ance o in e na ional laws and egula ions, a oid eso ing o and enac ing such measu es”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, pp. 1-2) 2024. “[…] om a legal pe spec i e, he imposi ion and applica ion o unila e al sanc ions is a g oss iola ion o he pu poses and p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions. Unila e al sanc ions ma e ially b each he pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions, pa icula ly hose se ou in A icle 1, pa ag aphs 2 and 3, o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, namely, o de elop iendly ela ions among na ions, o achie e in e na ional coope a ion in sol ing in e na ional p oblems o an economic, social, cul u al o humani a ian cha ac e , and in p omo ing and encou aging espec o human igh s. Simila ly, he in oduc ion and applica ion o unila e al sanc ions is a lag an iola ion o he p inciples o he Uni ed Na ions, in pa icula hose se o wa d in A icle 2, pa ag aphs 1 and 2, o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, conce ning he so e eign equali y o S a es and ul illing in good ai h he obliga ions assumed by Membe S a es unde he Cha e . Tha is why, acco ding o he 1970 Decla a ion on P inciples o In e na ional Law conce ning F iendly Rela ions and Coope a ion among S a es in acco dance wi h he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, all S a es should e ain om using mili a y, poli ical, economic o any o he ype o measu e o coe ce ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s and o secu e om i ad an ages o any kind. The imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions also con a enes he p inciples and no ms o in e na ional human igh s law and iola es a icle 2 o he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and Poli ical Righ s and a icle 2 o he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s, acco ding o which, ‘[i]n no case may a people be dep i ed o i s own means o subsis ence’. I also ma e ially b eaches a icle 47 o he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and Poli ical Righ s, as well as a icle 25 o he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s, acco ding o which, ‘[no hing he ein] shall be in e p e ed as impai ing he inhe en igh o all peoples o enjoy and u ilize ully and eely hei na u al weal h and esou ces’. Asia-Paci ic 25 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) Unila e al sanc ions u he mo e con adic he igh o e e yone o he enjoymen o he highes a ainable s anda d o physical and men al heal h, as se ou in a icle 12, pa ag aph 1, o he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s. Equally, hey iola e he inhe en igh o e e y human being o li e, as ea i med by a icle 6, pa ag aph 1, o he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and Poli ical Righ s, and no de oga ion he e om is pe mi ed, acco ding o he Co enan ’s a icle 4, pa ag aph 2. While unila e al sanc ions ad e sely a ec and iola e many o he human igh s, om he igh o wo k o he igh s o shel e , a decen en i onmen and educa ion, he e is no need o add o he examples I men ioned. […] I would now like o u n o he ques ion o why he in e na ional communi y o S a es mus pay se ious a en ion o he ho i ying end o he in oduc ion and applica ion o unila e al sanc ions. Tha is necessa y and u gen o he ollowing easons. Fi s , by any measu e, unila e al sanc ions a e inhumane, immo al and unlaw ul. They a e bo h a b u al collec i e punishmen o a ge ed na ions o hei de e mina ion o exe cise hei inhe en igh o sel -de e mina ion, as ecognized in A icle 1 o he Cha e , as well as a icle 1 o he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s and a icle 1 o he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and Poli ical Righ s. Secondly, human igh s a e no ealized in a acuum. Ra he , hey can be ealized only i he necessa y condi ions a e c ea ed, as has igh ly been s a ed in he p eamble o bo h Co enan s, and such condi ions canno be c ea ed, a leas no sa is ac o ily, in coun ies a ge ed by unila e al sanc ions, since sanc ions, in e alia, p e en such S a es om using hei esou ces, dis up hei economies and ade ela ions and p e en hem om impo ing hei people’s basic needs such as ood and medicine. Coun ies in oducing sanc ions weaponize ood, medicine, medical equipmen and o he necessi ies o u he hei na ow na ional policies. Unila e al sanc ions con inue o des oy he ab ic o mul ila e alism, wi h he Uni ed Na ions a i s cen e; se iously b each he le e and he spi i o he Cha e ; ejec coope a ion; omen con on a ion; and ins ead o p omo ing iendly ela ions, cause ha ed and hos ili y. All hose ala ming eali ies con inue o unde mine he e y essence and spi i o he O ganiza ion and i s Cha e , which we e ounded i s and o emos on such lo y alues as inclusion, coope a ion, peace ul coexis ence, good-neighbou liness, solida i y, eedom and jus ice. Unila e al sanc ions a e no hing bu economic wa and e o ism. They es ic he access o he a ge ed na ions o essen ial goods and se ices; exace ba e economic ha dship and po e y; unde mine he well-being o ci ilians and o dina y people; pe pe ua e a cycle o po e y, inequali y and human su e ing; and wo s o all, ha e he g ea es impac on he mos ulne able segmen s o a ge ed socie ies. We mus no allow ha dange ous end o unila e alism o unde mine he ule o law, mul ila e alism and ou collec i e endea ou s o p omo e peace, p ospe i y, solida i y and iendship among na ions. Tha is wha we owe o he cu en and u u e gene a ions o ou socie ies. I unchecked, he Wes e n S a es ha con inue o ace o he bo om on imposing mo e b u al sanc ions on mo e na ions will ul ima ely ans o m unila e al Asia-Paci ic Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 32 […] Gene al Assembly esolu ion 51/22 ecalled i s nume ous esolu ions in which i called upon he in e na ional communi y o ake u gen and e ec i e s eps o end coe ci e economic measu es, and exp essed g a e conce n o e he ecen enac men o ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic laws in con a en ion o he no ms o in e na ional law, he aims and pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions and he ele an p o isions o he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion. Tha esolu ion ea i med he inalienable igh o S a es o economic and social de elopmen and o choose hei poli ical, economic and social sys em on he basis o he in e na ional O ganiza ion's commi men o he consolida ion o he igh s o peoples embodied in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, in he in e es o achie ing he O ganiza ion's objec i es o he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 11-12) 2002. “The Go e nmen o he S a e o Qa a has consis en ly opposed he imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions on a so e eign S a e. The imposi ion o sanc ions on o he coun ies wi h a iew o economic in e es s o he achie emen o poli ical ends cons i u es a iola ion o he p inciple o so e eign equali y and he igh o sel - de e mina ion, as se o h in he Cha e and he ele an esolu ions o he Uni ed Na ions. I is also incompa ible wi h he de elopmen o iendly ela ions and he s eng hening o in e na ional coope a ion among Membe S a es. A icle 32 o he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es, adop ed by he Gene al Assembly in esolu ion 3281 (XXIX), s a es: “No S a e may use o encou age he use o economic, poli ical o any o he ype o measu es o coe ce ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s”. […] The S a e o Qa a he e o e a i ms i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s aimed a he ex a e i o ial applica ion o domes ic laws o na ionals o co po a ions o hi d coun ies o he pu pose o coe cing o he coun ies o comply wi h unila e ally adop ed economic measu es, which is con adic o y o in e na ional law and he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, pp. 3) S a e o Pales ine 2024. “[…] Unila e al coe ci e measu es, including blockades, unde mine he p inciples o so e eign y, sel -de e mina ion and in e na ional coope a ion ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. Those measu es in lic se e e ha m on he mos ulne able popula ions, exace ba e po e y and impede he de elopmen o he na ions ha hey a ge , pa icula ly de eloping coun ies. In doing so, hey obs uc ou collec i e e o s o achie e he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals, pa icula ly hose ela ed o ending po e y and hunge , ensu ing good heal h and well-being and os e ing inclusi e economic g ow h. In de eloping coun ies, he human cos o unila e al coe ci e measu es is s a k: hey a e no jus an abs ac concep , bu a he a pain ul eali y o hund eds o millions o pe sons a ound he wo ld. I is es ima ed ha well o e one hi d o he wo ld’s popula ion is a ec ed by unila e al coe ci e measu es. Families a e pushed deepe in o po e y, heal hca e sys ems a e s ained beyond capaci y, oppo uni ies o educa ion and employmen a e se e ely hinde ed, and access o echnology is Asia-Paci ic 33 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) ei he limi ed o es ic ed. Unila e al coe ci e measu es he e o e con a ene he p inciples o mul ila e alism as hey e ode he spi i o in e na ional coope a ion ha he Uni ed Na ions embodies, in addi ion o he ules and p inciples o in e na ional law. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 12-13) Sy ian A ab Republic 2002. I adhe es o esolu ion 55/6, he posi ion o he Non-Aligned Mo emen and he Sou h Summi Decla a ion. Thus, […] “all peoples ha e he igh o sel - de e mina ion and ha , by i ue o ha igh , o eely de e mine hei poli ical s a us and eely pu sue hei economic, social and cul u al de elopmen . […] exp essed he need o elimina e coe ci e measu es and legisla ion as con a y o in e na ional law, he p inciples and pu poses o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and he no ms and p inciples go e ning peace ul ela ions among S a es, and u ged S a es applying unila e al coe ci e measu es o pu an immedia e end o hose measu es. […] ejec ed he imposi ion o laws and egula ions wi h ex a e i o ial impac and all o he o ms o coe ci e economic measu es. They emphasized ha such ac ions no only unde mined he p inciples ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, bu also se e ely h ea ened he eedom o ade and in es men . They he e o e called on he in e na ional communi y nei he o ecognize hese measu es no o apply hem”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, p. 6) “[…] A na ion’s imposi ion o i s na ional laws on he na ionals o companies o hi d coun ies in such a way as o exceed i s e i o ial limi s is a u he iola ion o he so e eign igh s o S a es. Unila e al, ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es a e no jus a iola ion o he p inciples o in e na ional law and he s anda ds, goals and no ms go e ning in e na ional ade and Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion ag eemen s, hey also ha e nega i e consequences on he social and human de elopmen o de eloping coun ies ic imized by such measu es. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, pp. 8-9) 2024. “[…] The Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions a i med he p inciple o so e eign equali y among Membe S a es and p io i ized achie ing in e na ional coope a ion and p omo ing he economic and social ad ancemen o all peoples among i s pu poses. Wi h a iew o de eloping iendly ela ions among S a es and s eng hening in e na ional coope a ion on he basis o jus ice and equi y, he Gene al Assembly adop ed in 1970 esolu ion 2625 (XXV) con aining he Decla a ion on P inciples o In e na ional Law conce ning F iendly Rela ions and Coope a ion among S a es, which s ipula es: ‘No s a e may use o encou age he use o economic, poli ical o any o he ype o measu es o coe ce ano he s a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s and o secu e om i ad an ages o any kind’. The Gene al Assembly ea i med ha posi ion in a icle 32 o esolu ion 3281 (XXIX), adop ed in 1974, which includes he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es. […] Asia-Paci ic Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 34 In ecen yea s, he pace o he Uni ed S a es and he Eu opean Union imposing unila e al coe ci e measu es has inc eased. The scope o hose illegal measu es was expanded in hei a ious o ms and appella ions. Tha has caused ex eme economic ha dships o ou coun ies and immense humani a ian su e ing. I has p e en ed se e al peoples om enjoying hei undamen al igh s, including he igh o a digni ied li e, o heal h, ood and de elopmen . I has subjec ed hem o collec i e punishmen , which ep esen s a Uni ed Na ions Cha e iola ion. The Cha e en us ed he Secu i y Council, exclusi ely, wi h he powe o impose sanc ions, pu suan o he c i e ia se ou in Chap e 7. The Uni ed Na ions has condemned he imposi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es, conside ing hem o be bla an iola ions o he p o isions o in e na ional law and he pu poses and p inciples o he Cha e , as well as an obs acle o he enjoymen o human igh s. The ele an Gene al Assembly esolu ions ecognize ha coe ci e measu es di ec ly and se iously a ec all aspec s o li e in he a ge ed coun ies. Howe e , successi e Uni ed S a es Adminis a ions and he Eu opean Union ha e chosen o con inue o impose unila e al coe ci e measu es, igno ing he esolu ions o ou O ganiza ion and i s p inciples and in oking he so-called ules-based o de — and nobody knows wha hose ules a e — in hei a emp o consolida e such ules ins ead o being guided by he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . […] Sy ia ea i ms ha unila e al coe ci e measu es ep esen economic e o ism. They a e a swo d hanging o e he necks o peoples, inancial ins i u ions, comme cial and business sec o s in hi d coun ies, which e ain om ansac ing wi h he a ge ed S a es in o de o a oid being a ge ed hemsel es by he unjus Uni ed S a es sanc ions. Expe ience has shown he alsehood o wha is being said abou he humani a ian exemp ions. We wi nessed ha i s hand du ing he co ona i us disease pandemic and in he a e ma h o he de as a ing ea hquake in Sy ia las yea . The coun ies ha conside hose measu es as o eign policy ools ha e been o e ing baseless jus i ica ions o hei c iminal conduc agains ou peoples, bu such jus i ica ions will no change he ac ha unila e al coe ci e measu es un coun e o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e and he p inciples and ules o in e na ional law and in e na ional cus oma y law. They a e in e na ionally p ohibi ed ac s ha en ail esponsibili y o he coun ies imposing hem. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 26-28) Timo -Les e 2024. “[…] The use o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e measu es is a con o e sial opic, wi h ad oca es and c i ics bo h p esen ing alid a gumen s. Howe e , amid ha deba e, o e 30 coun ies a e being denied access o undamen al igh s as a esul o hose measu es, which iola es he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, a ious Uni ed Na ions esolu ions and he p inciple o mul ila e alism. Tha si ua ion highligh s he u gen need o a e-e alua ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es, as hey con adic he p inciples o in e na ional coope a ion and espec o so e eign y, causing ha m o innocen popula ions and unde mining global s abili y. Asia-Paci ic 35 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) I is essen ial o explo e al e na i e solu ions ha p io i ize dialogue, diplomacy and human igh s, ensu ing ha all na ions can access basic igh s and pa icipa e equally in he global communi y. The emo al o economic sanc ions, ade es ic ions and o he measu es imposed by one coun y on ano he wi hou he consen o he a ge ed coun y is a mus . As we ha e hea d om p e ious speake s, while such measu es a e o en used as a means o poli ical and economic p essu e, hey can ha e de as a ing consequences o he a ge ed coun ies, including economic ha dship and ins abili y, dis up ion o global supply chains, iola ions o so e eign y and in e na ional law, disc imina ion agains ce ain coun ies o indus ies, and he c ea ion o obs acles o economic de elopmen and coope a ion. As we all know, he p ac ice o coe ci e measu es was in oduced and imposed p ima ily by la ge and powe ul na ions agains smalle , economically weake S a es. They can ake many o ms, including economic sanc ions, ade emba goes, asse eezes, in es men es ic ions, a el bans and o he o ms o coe ci e measu es used agains a ge ed na ions, such as in he case o Cuba, Nica agua and Venezuela. Those coun ies, along wi h o he a ge ed coun ies, ha e seen he wo s o economic ha dship and poli ical ins abili y. Wo se s ill, innocen popula ions, p ima ily ulne able g oups such as he elde ly, women and you h, bea he b un o such measu es. Unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es should ind no place in ou wo ld oday. They iola e S a e so e eign y and in e na ional law, unde mining he p inciples o equali y and non-in e e ence. They iola e he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, human igh s p inciples, he In e na ional Co enan on Ci il and Poli ical Righ s and he In e na ional Co enan on Economic, Social and Cul u al Righ s. Thei humani a ian impac is signi ican , wi h innocen ci ilians bea ing he b un . They hinde economic de elopmen and coope a ion, es ic access o ma ke s, echnology and esou ces and limi he po en ial o economic g ow h and di e si ica ion, he eby pe pe ua ing economic inequali y and dependence and unde mining he achie emen o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. As we ha e seen hus a , coe ci e measu es a e employed as a means o poli ical coe cion, a he han as a legi ima e esponse o poli ical o economic conce ns. Tha unde mines he ule o law and pe pe ua es a cul u e o “migh makes igh ”, a he han encou aging diplomacy, solu ions and dialogue. Coe ci e measu es can also lead o e alia ion om a ec ed pa ies, escala e ensions and po en ially spa k ade wa s. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 11-12) Yemen 2000. “The Republic o Yemen ei e a ed i s opposi ion o he unila e al puni i e economic, comme cial and inancial emba go imposed by he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica agains he Libyan A ab Jamahi iya and, acco dingly, he Go e nmen o Yemen, main aining i s adi ional posi ion o espec o he sel -de e mina ion o peoples, has nei he p omulga ed no applied unila e ally any laws agains Libya”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 7) Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 36 EASTERN EUROPE A menia 2002. “[…] A menia condemns he con inuing p ac ice o unila e al coe ci e economic measu es, pa icula ly in he Sou h Caucasus egion. Such measu es con adic he basic measu es and no ms o in e na ional law and he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , as well as he no ms and egula ions o he mul ila e al ading sys em. The imposi ion o such es ic i e economic measu es has a de imen al impac on de eloping and ansi ional coun ies, as in he case o landlocked A menia, which, in addi ion o a geog aphical impedimen , is su e ing om a con inuing blockade. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 13) Bela us 2024. “[…] Those esponsible o unila e al sanc ions canno be unawa e o he eal consequences o such measu es, which iola e e e y concei able no m o in e na ional law and all human igh s and a e aimed solely a unde mining he independen o eign policy o ce ain undesi able coun ies. The e is no such hing as a sma sanc ion. All illegal economic sanc ions a e aimed a s angling and des oying he economy o a coun y and he eby lowe ing he li ing s anda ds o i s people. […] By analysing da a on he impac o sanc ions on people, esea che s ha e come o he conclusion ha unila e al measu es a e compa able in hei impac s o acu e a med con lic s and na u al disas e s. We p opose ha illegal unila e al sanc ions be conside ed no jus economic e o ism bu also ac s o agg ession, wi h all he consequences ha en ails. Bela us is p oud o i s achie emen s in social policy and economy. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 19-20) Bosnia and He zego ina 2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no esponsible. […] Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med Eas e n Eu ope 37 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul ools o he in e na ional communi y. Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […] Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non- ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he Secu i y Council o ac .. […] The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions. The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o en i ies commi ing such iola ions. EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law, human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by de aul , om EU sanc ions. […] EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals, legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so. EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9) Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 38 Bulga ia 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic Eas e n Eu ope 39 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Czechia 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 40 The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Es onia 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. Eas e n Eu ope 41 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Geo gia 2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no esponsible. […] Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul ools o he in e na ional communi y. Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […] Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non- ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he Secu i y Council o ac .. […] The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 48 Poland 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Republic o Moldo a 2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no esponsible. […] Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he Eas e n Eu ope 49 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul ools o he in e na ional communi y. Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […] Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non- ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he Secu i y Council o ac .. […] The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions. The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o en i ies commi ing such iola ions. EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law, human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by de aul , om EU sanc ions. […] EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals, legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so. EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 50 ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9) Romania 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o Eas e n Eu ope 51 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Russian Fede a ion 2024. “[…] Today in he Gene al Assembly, a e a b eak o many yea s, we ha e an oppo uni y o make a comp ehensi e assessmen o he p ac ice o unila e al coe ci e economic measu es. Tha p ac ice o Wes e n coun ies is no only con a y o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and he en i e wo ld o de ha i ensh ines, i is also an obs acle o in e na ional de elopmen , coope a ion and human igh s. I is a p ac ice ha is qui e li e ally killing people by dep i ing hem o wha hey need mos . To s a wi h, ou opponen s a e ying o equa e Secu i y Council sanc ions wi h illegal unila e al coe ci e measu es in o de o s ee he discussion away om an unpleasan subjec . Fi s o all, Secu i y Council sanc ions a e an auxilia y ins umen o esponding o he eme gence o h ea s o in e na ional peace and secu i y. Thei applica ion should be calib a ed, a ge ed and ime-limi ed and should ake in o accoun he en i e ange o po en ial humani a ian, socioeconomic and human igh s consequences. Secu i y Council sanc ions egimes ha e o be egula ly e iewed o ensu e ha hey a e esponding app op ia ely o he si ua ion on he g ound. As he s abili y o he poli ical con ex imp o es, so mus he in e na ional es ic ions be eased and ul ima ely li ed al oge he . I is impe missible o abuse his ool in o de o pu sue un ai compe i ion and punish undesi able S a es. I is also impe missible o supplemen Secu i y Council sanc ions wi h unila e al es ic i e measu es, pa icula ly hose o an ex a e i o ial na u e. Tu ning o unila e al measu es ha ci cum en he Secu i y Council, he subjec o ou agenda oday, we unde sco e ha he Wes e n unila e al coe ci e measu es a ge coun ies ha ha e independen o eign and domes ic policies and he e o e some imes espond o ha independence wi h neocolonialis economic me hods and models. The aims o such sanc ions campaigns a e openly decla ed. They a e Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 52 designed o isola e coun ies inancially and echnologically in o de o unde mine hei p ospec s, weaken hei domes ic poli ical ci cums ances, c ea e p econdi ions o egime change and exe ex e nal con ol o e so e eign esou ces. Howe e , he Wes e n coun ies y o con ince us ha hey a e ac ing law ully. They say hey a e only encou aging o he coun ies o ul il hei obliga ions unde in e na ional law and allege ha he coe ci e measu es s em om hei opponen s’ own in e na ional obliga ions. We ha e hea d ha oday as well. In ha ega d, I would like some answe s o a numbe o ques ions. Fi s , who appoin ed hem he judge o who, whe e, when and how much o he s a e ul illing hei obliga ions? Le me emind hem ha unde he Cha e , he igh o in oduce coe ci e measu es is he p e oga i e o he Secu i y Council alone. Mo eo e , no a single in e na ional ea y p o ides ha i in he opinion o he Wes i s p o isions a e being iola ed by any S a e, Wes e n coun ies hen ha e he igh o abuse hei posi ion as he global inancial hegemon and hinde ha S a e’s ade o seize i s so e eign asse s. Secondly, wha should we do when he Wes i sel iola es i s obliga ions? The answe is o cou se clea . The e a e no such iola ions. The posi ion o coun ies ha p ac ice illegal unila e al coe ci e measu es can be exp essed in a well-known La in maxim: quod lice Io i, non lice bo i — Jo e may do wha ca le may no . In o he wo ds, he e is no legal basis, me ely ules ha he Wes changes as i goes along o sui i s in e es s. As has al eady been said oday, unila e al measu es a e cu en ly in e ec agains oughly 30 coun ies wi h a o al popula ion o almos 2 billion people, meaning ha mo e han a qua e o he wo ld’s popula ion a e dealing wi h illegal es ic ions on hei economic ac i i y. […] In gene al, we wan o emphasize ha he Wes e n coun ies’ a emp s o main ain hei slipping hegemony — and hei eliance on un ai compe i ion, “g een” ba ie s, clamping down on e ec i e o ms o echnology and in es men lows and e ec ing o he new kinds o ba ie s — a e sel -des uc i e choices by ou opponen s, whose own popula ions a e al eady exp essing hei opinion o hem. Unlaw ul and uncon olled economic p essu e om Wes e n coun ies is ensu ing ha he e will be s eng hened join esis ance o hose measu es and consolida ion a ound a new global model based on polycen ici y, equali y and mu ual espec […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 23-25) Slo akia 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Eas e n Eu ope 53 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 54 Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Slo enia 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and Eas e n Eu ope 55 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Uk aine 1996. “In spi e o he ac ha eso o unila e al measu es o economic compulsion no sanc ioned by he wo ld communi y o he pu pose o gaining poli ical di idends has been epea edly deplo ed in he highes in e na ional o ums, including hose held unde Uni ed Na ions auspices, we no e wi h eg e ha his p ac ice emains in he poli ical a senals o some S a es, which use i o in e e e in he in e nal a ai s o o he S a es and, in ce ain si ua ions, o so-called ma e ial suppo o di ec e i o ial claims. Tha is why ou delega ion s ongly belie es ha his p oblem should no be ea ed as ela ing exclusi ely o he de eloping coun ies. I is simila ly acu e o he new so e eign S a es ha a e expe iencing oday a complica ed and some imes e y pain ul pe iod o achie ing sel -de e mina ion and es ablishing hei own models o na ional de elopmen . […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, pp. 15-17) 2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no esponsible. […] Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is Eas e n Eu ope Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 56 h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul ools o he in e na ional communi y. Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […] Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non- ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he Secu i y Council o ac .. […] The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions. The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o en i ies commi ing such iola ions. EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law, human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by de aul , om EU sanc ions. […] EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals, legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so. EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei Eas e n Eu ope 57 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9) La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 64 Hondu as he e o e main ains i s p incipled posi ion no o p omo e o apply any unila e al economic o ade measu es o laws agains o he S a es ha would a ec he ee conduc o in e na ional ade, in compliance wi h ou obliga ions unde he Uni ed Na ions Cha e and in e na ional law. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, p. 11) Jamaica 2002. “The Go e nmen o Jamaica has epea edly suppo ed he esolu ions o he Gene al Assembly o da e, in which i condemns he use o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion. Such p ac ices a e con a y o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and he p inciples o in e na ional law. Unila e al coe ci e economic measu es h ea en he so e eign y o S a es, wi h dele e ious e ec s on all aspec s o hei de elopmen . As a me hod o economic o poli ical compulsion, hey a e an a on o he a ge ed S a e and comp omise i s economic, poli ical and cul u al iden i y. They a ec he mos ulne able g oups in socie y, including women, child en and he disabled. […]”. (A/57/179, 2 July 2002, p. 2) Mexico 2000. “Mexico is con inced ha he in e na ional communi y should adop u gen and e ec i e measu es o p e en he imposi ion agains de eloping coun ies o coe ci e economic measu es which a e no exp essly au ho ized by he ele an o gans o he Uni ed Na ions o a e inconsis en wi h he p inciples o in e na ional law as se o h in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. The esolu ion o con lic s by peace ul means is essen ial o he coexis ence o na ions. Consul a ion and nego ia ion a e he ins umen s h ough which na ions should esol e hei p oblems. Mexico is also opposed o he use o any ype o unila e al measu e, whe he economic o poli ical, by any S a e as a means o exe ing p essu e in o de o change poli ical o economic p ocesses ou side i s ju isdic ion. I will be ecalled ha , in 1996, Mexico p omulga ed he Ac o p o ec ade and in es men om o eign no ms ha con a ene in e na ional law, […]”. (A/55/300, 17 Augus 2000, p. 7) 2024. “Mexico has ei e a ed many imes ha he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions es ablishes ha he Secu i y Council is he only body en i led o impose sanc ions i i deems hem necessa y in cases whe e he e a e h ea s o peace and secu i y. The applica ion o unila e al economic, inancial o comme cial measu es is simply incompa ible wi h he Cha e and he p inciples o in e na ional law, especially hose ela ing o equali y among S a es and he igh o sel -de e mina ion. Such measu es ha e a nega i e impac on indi iduals’ enjoymen o hei human igh s, on he sus ainable de elopmen o S a es and on he economic p ospec s o La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean 65 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) de eloping coun ies, and hey a e an obs acle o p og ess owa ds he ul ilmen o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. Unila e al sanc ions also ha e nega i e e ec s on ci ilians li ing in con lic and pos - con lic si ua ions. In ou own egion o La in Ame ica, we ha e seen how unila e al coe ci e measu es hinde de elopmen and con ibu e o inc eases in i egula mig a ion. In ha ega d, in ollow-up o he commi men s a ising om he Palenque Summi , on he heme o “good-neighbou liness and well-being”, we call o he li ing o he unila e al coe ci e measu es ha ha e been imposed on he coun ies o ou egion, which, as I said, a e con a y o in e na ional law. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 22-23) Nica agua 2024. “[…] Since 1983, he Gene al Assembly has adop ed esolu ions ecognizing he nega i e e ec o unila e al coe ci e measu es on he economies o de eloping coun ies and he ac ha such illegal measu es in no way bene i mul ila e alism o con ibu e o c ea ing a clima e o peace and iendly ela ions among S a es. Since 2000, he imposi ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es has become a key o eign policy ool used by coun ies such as he Uni ed S a es and he membe S a es o he Eu opean Union, which ha e imposed mo e han 26,000 sanc ions a ec ing almos one hi d o he wo ld’s popula ion. Such coe ci e measu es ample people’s igh s o sel -de e mina ion and eedom. Mo e han 40 yea s a e he adop ion o esolu ion 38/197 o 1983, en i led “Economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic coe cion agains de eloping coun ies”, he Uni ed S a es and i s allies con inue o display hei impe ial a ogance wi h o al impuni y, by aking ad an age o hei dominan posi ion in he in e na ional economy and using such economic measu es o exe cise p essu e on o o cibly in luence he so e eign decisions o de eloping coun ies. The Gene al Assembly has ecognized he ex a e i o ial na u e o hose coe ci e legisla i e and adminis a i e measu es, policies and p ac ices, which a e adop ed unila e ally o obs uc he de elopmen o people and he ull ealiza ion o hei human igh s. The Gene al Assembly has p esc ibed ha de eloped coun ies mus e ain om he h ea o applica ion o ade es ic ions, blockades and o he economic measu es ha un con a y o he p o isions o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. The Cha e es ablishes he so e eign equali y o all S a es. Howe e , bo h he Cha e and in e na ional law a e con enien ly applied by he impe ialis Powe s, which ha e con e ed upon hemsel es he au ho i y o c ea e unila e al lis s, no only by ins umen alizing human igh s and democ acy bu also by alsely accusing o he s o sponso ing e o ism, unde con i ed p e ex s and con a y o in e na ional law. A icle 32 o he Cha e o Economic Righ s and Du ies o S a es, adop ed in esolu ion 3281 (XXIX), o 1974, es ablished ha , “No S a e may use o encou age he use o economic, poli ical o any o he ype o measu es o coe ce ano he S a e in o de o ob ain om i he subo dina ion o he exe cise o i s so e eign igh s [o secu e om i ad an ages o any kind].” […] La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 66 Those unila e al coe ci e measu es a e u he examples o he use o o ce and mechanisms o in e e e in he in e nal a ai s o S a es, which is p ohibi ed by he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. They cons i u e a collec i e punishmen agains peoples, dis up he economies o coun ies and a ec he s anda d o li ing o en i e popula ions, es ic ing hei access o ood, medicine, wa e and sani a ion, heal h, housing, educa ion and employmen , wi h he aim o p o oking social discon en and o e h owing legi ima e Go e nmen s. Such measu es a e usually based on ake news and a e accompanied by nega i e s e eo ypes and ha e speech agains b o he ly coun ies, such as China, Cuba, I an, Bela us, E i ea, Nica agua, Venezuela, Russia and o he coun ies, including Zimbabwe, which a e also ic ims o such measu es. Coe ci e measu es a e no innocen ools o so powe . They kill jus as bulle s kill in wa . They s a e people o dea h. They kill people by dep i ing hem o medicine. They a e aimed a delibe a ely a ec ing he li ing condi ions o a popula ion o b ing abou i s o al o pa ial physical des uc ion. Tha is called genocide. I is impe a i e o immedia ely suspend he unila e al coe ci e economic measu es imposed on ou peoples. We mus elimina e hose agg essions, which a e genuine obs acles o he e adica ion o po e y, and ad ance owa ds he achie emen o he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals con ained in he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen . The Gene al Assembly mus be p oac i e. I mus no be sa is ied wi h encou aging and condemning hose genocidal p ac ices in iola ion o in e na ional law. The Gene al Assembly mus adop a esolu ion in acco dance wi h A icle 96 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e , e e ing he legal issues ela ed o he unpunished implemen a ion o illegal unila e al coe ci e measu es o he In e na ional Cou o Jus ice, eques ing an ad iso y opinion on he consequences o he con inued imposi ion o such measu es and es ablishing he obliga ion o compensa e he coun ies ha a e ic ims o hose measu es o he damages caused”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 18-20) Sain Vincen and he G enadines 2024. “[…] Today’s imely, albei o e due, discussion is occu ing a a pi o al momen . The wo ld is augh wi h disco d, and we a e wi nessing inc easing ecou se o he p omulga ion o unila e al economic coe ci e measu es, which a e o en applied agains de eloping coun ies by de eloped coun ies in he pu sui o na ionalis ic agendas o o he sake o poli ical expediency. This cons i u es a g a e h ea o he no ms and p inciples go e ning iendly ela ions among S a es, u he unde mining he e y ules o engagemen upon which ou in e na ional sys em has been buil and h ea ening an al eady agile mul ila e al o de . Such measu es a e imposed in iola ion o in e na ional law and ha e been condemned ca ego ially by an o e whelming majo i y o he Gene al Assembly, as in he case o he esolu ion en i led ‘Necessi y o ending he economic, comme cial and inancial emba go imposed by he Uni ed S a es agains Cuba’. This indica es ha hei use is a a iance wi h he goodwill o he in e na ional communi y and he spi i o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean 67 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) No S a e has he igh no he au ho i y o ci cum en in e na ional law. The p omulga ion and applica ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es is a iola ion o he commi men made by we he peoples o he Uni ed Na ions. I demons a es a bla an dis ega d o mul ila e alism and mul ila e al ins i u ions, sugges ing ha in e na ional no ms, s anda ds and laws can be lou ed wi h impuni y, he esul o which is an e osion o us , always wi h di e consequences o ci izens. Too o en, unila e al coe ci e measu es a e a ool used as pa o he powe dynamic be ween S a es, wi hou ega d o he o en-de as a ing e ec ha hey ha e on he well-being o peoples. These measu es impede he ull ealiza ion o human igh s and cons ain access o heal hca e and o he basic, e e yday necessi ies, o which e e y human being is dese ing. They also o en ha e a - eaching consequences, such as impeding e o s o s eng hen Sou h-Sou h coope a ion. The dis up ion o he Pe oCa ibe ag eemen — he concessiona y inancial oil ag eemen be ween Venezuela and Ca ibbean Membe S a es — had a signi ican impac on he economies o he pa ies o he ag eemen . Mo eo e , he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es impedes he o e all de elopmen o a S a e, including i s abili y o implemen he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen and a ain he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals — ano he amewo k wi hin which we ha e made a people-cen ic p omise. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 3-4) Venezuela 1996. “We o ed in a ou o his esolu ion because we ag ee wi h he main elemen s i con ains. […] We belie e ha ope a i e pa ag aph 1 can be unde s ood only in he con ex o S a es’ ull compliance wi h he commi men s hey ha e en e ed in o unde he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, in e na ional law, democ a ic p inciples and he Uni e sal Decla a ion o Human Righ s”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 23) 2024. “Since a leas 2014, he c iminal Uni ed S a es Go e nmen , allied wi h sec o s o he e il and co up Venezuelan and La in Ame ican ul a- igh oliga chy, has been applying one o he mos agg essi e illegal sanc ions p og ammes in mode n his o y agains Venezuela. I s pu pose has always been o impose a policy o egime change and i s p eda o y model on a people who, in building hei eedom and independence, ha e e used o gi e in o i s blackmail, and who a e i mly de e mined o be he mas e s o hei own des iny. As pa o wha hey called a maximum p essu e campaign agains ou coun y, a whole ne wo k o lies and legal and inancial alsehoods has been app o ed o a ack ou people — c iminal laws, damaging execu i e o de s, lis s o sanc ioned en i ies and people and egula ions aimed speci ically a ou coun y. All o hose ac ions make up a c iminal s uc u e ha seeks o legi imize and jus i y an illegal and spu ious policy, applied ex a e i o ially, designed o conceal he conduc o a decaden empi e ha belie es i can ac wi h impuni y in he ace o a weak in e na ional sys em. Tha se o sys ema ic and sus ained measu es o economic e o ism — mo e han 930 o da e — applied by he Go e nmen o he Uni ed S a es, he Eu opean Union and o he sa elli e na ions has esul ed in eezing he La in Ame ica and he Ca ibbean Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 68 Venezuelan people’s asse s and p ope y. They ha e blocked accoun s and p e en ed bank ans e s, among o he hings in e up ing ou coun y’s paymen o deb s and collec ion o in e es , i les and bonds. They ha e p e en ed he pu chase o machine y, supplies and pa s o a ious kinds on he in e na ional ma ke . They ha e pa alysed he con ac ing o se ices a he in e na ional le el, exe ed p essu e aimed a discou aging economic and comme cial exchanges be ween Venezuela and hi d coun ies and hinde ed impo s o goods and se ices ha a e essen ial o ensu ing he wel a e o he Venezuelan people. Those measu es, which cons i u e mode n-day colonialis p ac ices, a e aimed a achie ing he collapse o he Venezuelan na ional economy and a manu ac u ing and inducing an unp eceden ed mul i ac o ial c isis, wi h a nega i e impac on he public and p i a e economy o ou na ion. Tha has been acknowledged by he p omo e s o hose c imes agains humani y hemsel es. One o he c iminals, William B own ield, he in amous ep esen a i e o he genocidal Go e nmen o he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica, con essed: ‘We mus ea his as an agony, a agedy ha will con inue un il i eaches an end ... and i we can do any hing o speed i up, we mus do i , unde s anding ha his is going o ha e an impac on millions o people who a e al eady ha ing di icul y inding ood and medicine ... We canno do his and p e end ha i is no going o ha e an impac . We ha e o make a ha d decision. The desi ed end jus i ies his se e e punishmen ’. Howe e , o e ade hei in e na ional esponsibili y o he c imes commi ed, he inancial execu ione s who impose ha se o unila e al coe ci e measu es y o hide behind he issuance o he well-known licenses. In eali y, such licenses, which in some cases a e e en euphemis ically p esen ed as so-called humani a ian exemp ions, a e a means o adminis e ing collec i e punishmen , a mechanism o economic neocoloniza ion ha en o ces condi ions on he a acked S a es and adap s o he poli ical and economic in e es s o p i a e co po a ions and he Go e nmen o he agg esso S a e. In o he wo ds, hey a e licenses o domina e, adminis e pain, deepen and ex end he s uc u al ies o economic and inancial dependence — a dependence al eady sus ained by an unjus in e na ional sys em and designed o sui he in e es s o he No h — and manipula e he so e eign y and sel - de e mina ion o peoples. […]” (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 3-6) Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es 69 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) WESTERN EUROPEAN AND OTHER STATES Aus alia 1996. “My delega ion abs ained in he o ing on d a esolu ion A/51/L.23 because he d a esolu ion ails o d aw a clea dis inc ion be ween measu es imposed unila e ally by indi idual S a es and hose measu es ha a e unde aken pu suan o esolu ions o he Secu i y Council unde he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . Aus alia has, in his and o he o ums, made clea i s opposi ion o na ional legisla ion ha seeks o impose ex a e i o ial sanc ions, de e mined unila e ally, on companies and indi iduals o hi d coun ies”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 21) 1998. “Aus alia d aws a clea dis inc ion be ween sanc ions imposed unila e ally on o he coun ies by indi idual S a es and hose sanc ions ha a e p omulga ed and implemen ed wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council. This esolu ion does no di e en ia e su icien ly be ween hose wo e y di e en se s o ci cums ances. Fu he mo e, i con ains o he language which Aus alia conside s p oblema ic. In pa icula , i s e e ence o he inalienable igh o e e y S a e o choose he poli ical, economic and social sys em ha i deems mos app op ia e o he wel a e o i s people appea s o unde mine he uni e sali y o undamen al human igh s. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 18) 2000. “When his i em was conside ed in he Gene al Assembly wo yea s ago, Aus alia abs ained in he o e on he d a esolu ion because o conce n ha i did no adequa ely di e en ia e be ween unila e al ex a e i o ial measu es, abou which we ha e long-s anding conce ns, and sanc ions p omulga ed and implemen ed wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council. […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 23) 2002. “Aus alia con inues o oppose he applica ion o ex a e i o ial unila e al economic coe ci e measu es ha a ec hi d coun ies and, he e o e, we suppo he cen al ene s o his d a esolu ion. Howe e , unde ce ain ex eme ci cums ances, i may be app op ia e o S a es o ake app op ia e measu es aimed a encou aging o he Go e nmen s o cease iola ing hei ci izens’ human igh s and igno ing he ule o law. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 13) 2024. “I am pleased o deli e his s a emen on behal o Canada and my own coun y, Aus alia. Canada and Aus alia ejec he claim ha au onomous sanc ions a e illegi ima e o illegal. Canada and Aus alia apply au onomous sanc ions judiciously, anspa en ly and consis en ly wi h in e na ional law, including he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. Au onomous sanc ions a e aimed a de e ing and p e en ing he e y beha iou s ha pose a h ea o in e na ional peace and secu i y, including human igh s iola ions and abuses and se ious co up ion, and a es ic ing he Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 70 p oli e a ion o weapons o mass des uc ion. The Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions ecognizes ha he e a e imes when sanc ions a e necessa y o add ess h ea s o global peace and secu i y. By imposing au onomous sanc ions, Membe S a es send a clea signal ha policies and beha iou s ha iola e in e na ional ules, no ms and conduc will no be ole a ed. Canada and Aus alia also challenge he claim ha con empo a y au onomous sanc ions disp opo iona ely impac ulne able people. Ou sanc ions a ge egimes ha gi e li le conside a ion o he needs o hei people. And sanc ions a ge en i ies ha ca y ou c imes whose ic ims a e e e yday people in ou communi ies. When Canada and Aus alia implemen a ge ed sanc ions measu es, we s i e o minimize any ad e se consequences o ci ilian popula ions and o legi ima e business and humani a ian ac i i ies. We wo k closely wi h he p i a e sec o and humani a ian pa ne s o ensu e ha humani a ian aid can be deli e ed e ec i ely in con ex s in which sanc ions apply. And we s and eady o add ess any legi ima e conce ns in ha ega d. Canada and Aus alia expec he Secu i y Council o lead on applying and moni o ing he implemen a ion o sanc ions egimes ha i has adop ed. Bu on ma e s in which he Council is blocked om esponding o eg egious beha iou , including iola ions o he Cha e , we look o a b oade se o ools o ensu e ha egimes and e o is s canno bene i om in e na ional c imes. Sanc ions a e one o a sui e o ools ha we use o espond o si ua ions o in e na ional conce n. […] Finally, Canada and Aus alia a e deeply conce ned ha his deba e con inues o d aw a en ion away om p essing in e na ional issues. C i icisms o au onomous sanc ions, oo o en, a e a delibe a e e o o di e a en ion om b eaches o in e na ional peace and secu i y, se ious human igh s iola ions, weapons p oli e a ion and e o ism — an e o made by pe pe a o s o hose iola ions and h ea s. We u ge all Membe S a es o ocus on he undamen al need o p omo e espec o he Cha e and in e na ional law”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 13- 14) 1997. “Belgium, like i s pa ne s in he Eu opean Union, is opposed o he ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional legisla ion, mo e pa icula ly he unila e al imposi ion o comme cial measu es, especially sanc ions. The Eu opean Union con i med his posi ion in i s explana ion o o e when he Gene al Assembly o ed on esolu ion 51/22, en i led ‘Elimina ion o coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion” on 27 No embe 1996”. (A/52/343, 15 Sep embe 1997, p. 2) Canada 1996. “[…] Canada has always aken a igo ous s and agains measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec ha seek o cons ain he eedom o in es men and ade o hi d coun ies. While he esolu ion we ha e jus conside ed calls o he epeal o unila e al, ex a e i o ial laws ha impose sanc ions on o he S a es, i ails o make clea he essen ial dis inc ion be ween hose measu es unde aken wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council and in con o mi y wi h he Cha e o he Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es 71 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) Uni ed Na ions, and hose imposed unila e ally by indi idual S a es. As a esul , we we e no able o lend ou suppo o his ex ”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 22) 1998. “[…] Canada has always been i mly opposed o ex a e i o ial measu es aimed a limi ing he eedom o ade and in es men o hi d pa ies. While he esolu ion we ha e jus conside ed equi es ha unila e al ex a e i o ial laws imposing sanc ions on hi d pa ies mus be epealed, i ails o dis inguish clea ly be ween measu es aken unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council and in acco dance wi h he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, and measu es imposed unila e ally by S a es. The e o e, we ha e no been able o suppo he esolu ion”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 18) 2002. “[…] Canada opposes ex a e i o ial measu es ha con adic o unde mine he laws o clea ly enuncia ed policies o ano he S a e exe cising concu en ju isdic ion on a e i o ial basis o e he same conduc . Wi h espec o he esolu ion jus adop ed, Canada unde s ands ha he inclusion o he e m “coe ci e”, no ably in ope a i e pa ag aph 4, is in ended o ensu e ha he scope o he esolu ion is mean o apply o he S a e ha is he subjec o he sanc ions o o a ec ed hi d S a es and hei na ionals and co po a ions. Canada’s unde s anding is ha he inclusion o he wo d “coe ci e” is no in ended o condemn unila e al p esc ip i e measu es ha apply he objec i e na ionali y p inciple. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 13) 2024. “I am pleased o deli e his s a emen on behal o Canada and my own coun y, Aus alia. Canada and Aus alia ejec he claim ha au onomous sanc ions a e illegi ima e o illegal. Canada and Aus alia apply au onomous sanc ions judiciously, anspa en ly and consis en ly wi h in e na ional law, including he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. Au onomous sanc ions a e aimed a de e ing and p e en ing he e y beha iou s ha pose a h ea o in e na ional peace and secu i y, including human igh s iola ions and abuses and se ious co up ion, and a es ic ing he p oli e a ion o weapons o mass des uc ion. The Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions ecognizes ha he e a e imes when sanc ions a e necessa y o add ess h ea s o global peace and secu i y. By imposing au onomous sanc ions, Membe S a es send a clea signal ha policies and beha iou s ha iola e in e na ional ules, no ms and conduc will no be ole a ed. Canada and Aus alia also challenge he claim ha con empo a y au onomous sanc ions disp opo iona ely impac ulne able people. Ou sanc ions a ge egimes ha gi e li le conside a ion o he needs o hei people. And sanc ions a ge en i ies ha ca y ou c imes whose ic ims a e e e yday people in ou communi ies. When Canada and Aus alia implemen a ge ed sanc ions measu es, we s i e o minimize any ad e se consequences o ci ilian popula ions and o legi ima e business and humani a ian ac i i ies. We wo k closely wi h he p i a e sec o and humani a ian pa ne s o ensu e ha humani a ian aid can be deli e ed e ec i ely Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 72 in con ex s in which sanc ions apply. And we s and eady o add ess any legi ima e conce ns in ha ega d. Canada and Aus alia expec he Secu i y Council o lead on applying and moni o ing he implemen a ion o sanc ions egimes ha i has adop ed. Bu on ma e s in which he Council is blocked om esponding o eg egious beha iou , including iola ions o he Cha e , we look o a b oade se o ools o ensu e ha egimes and e o is s canno bene i om in e na ional c imes. Sanc ions a e one o a sui e o ools ha we use o espond o si ua ions o in e na ional conce n. […] Finally, Canada and Aus alia a e deeply conce ned ha his deba e con inues o d aw a en ion away om p essing in e na ional issues. C i icisms o au onomous sanc ions, oo o en, a e a delibe a e e o o di e a en ion om b eaches o in e na ional peace and secu i y, se ious human igh s iola ions, weapons p oli e a ion and e o ism — an e o made by pe pe a o s o hose iola ions and h ea s. We u ge all Membe S a es o ocus on he undamen al need o p omo e espec o he Cha e and in e na ional law”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 13- 14) Iceland 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es 73 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no esponsible. […] Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul ools o he in e na ional communi y. Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […] Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non- ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he Secu i y Council o ac .. […] The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions. The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o en i ies commi ing such iola ions. EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law, human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by de aul , om EU sanc ions. […] EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals, Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 80 business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9) San Ma ino 1997. “The Pe manen Mission o he Republic o San Ma ino o he Uni ed Na ions has he honou o in o m he Sec e a y-Gene al o he Uni ed Na ions ha he Republic o San Ma ino does no ha e any laws ega ding he abo e-men ioned ques ion and has ne e applied such measu es o sanc ions”. (A/52/343, 15 Sep embe 1997, p. 4) Tü kiye 1996. “[…] Tu key is basing i s o e only on i s opposi ion o he p ac ice o ex a e i o iali y — in o he wo ds, any p ac ice ha ex ends he applica ion o a coun y’s legisla ion ou side i s ju isdic ion. The applica ion o ex a e i o ial measu es no only uns coun e o in e na ional law bu also has a nega i e impac on he economic in e es s o hi d coun ies and on he ee low o in e na ional ade. In he iew o my delega ion, coe ci e economic measu es can be imposed only by he Uni ed Na ions in con o mi y wi h i s Cha e . Ou o e in a ou o he d a esolu ion be o e us simply e lec s hese conside a ions”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 20) 1998. “[…] opposi ion in p inciple o he ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional legisla ion, which is no in acco dance wi h he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) Uni ed Kingdom o G ea B i ain and No he n I eland 2024. “The Uni ed Kingdom main ains ha ou au onomous sanc ions s ongly suppo and a e consis en wi h he undamen al pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions, as exp essed in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. The Uni ed Kingdom’s p e e ence is o suppo sanc ions h ough he Secu i y Council in o de o ad ance in e na ional peace and secu i y. […] The Uni ed Kingdom’s au onomous sanc ions a e consis en wi h in e na ional law. They a e a ge ed and a e ocused on de e ing and dis up ing malign beha iou and demons a ing suppo o in e na ional no ms. Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es 81 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) We ecognize ha o he Gene al Assembly membe s also use sanc ions, e en i hey do no call hem ha , as do some egional o ganiza ions. The Uni ed Kingdom de ends he igh o S a es o use sanc ions in compliance wi h in e na ional law. The Uni ed Kingdom’s sanc ions legisla ion is binding only on pe sons o he Uni ed Kingdom o pe sons wi hin he Uni ed Kingdom. While i egula es how hose wi hin ou ju isdic ion engage wi h sanc ioned indi iduals, en i ies and S a es, i does no a emp o egula e he ac i i ies o hose ou side ou ju isdic ion. E e y sanc ion o he Uni ed Kingdom complies wi h ou domes ic and in e na ional legal obliga ions, including ou human igh s obliga ions, which a e indi idually assessed o each lis ing. Ou legisla ion p o ides o a anspa en and obus sys em o legal challenge and e iew. We use sanc ions p opo iona ely and igo ously, including by aking ca e ul s eps o mi iga e any unin ended nega i e impac s. Tha includes issuing licences o espond o humani a ian eme gencies, such as ea hquake elie in Sy ia. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, p. 5) Uni ed S a es o Ame ica 1996. “[…] Libya would ha e Uni ed Na ions Membe S a es belie e ha his d a esolu ion is abou ee ade and he igh o S a es o choose hei own models o economic de elopmen . I is no . I is aimed a dis ac ing a en ion om Libya’s obs ina e e usal o comply wi h i s obliga ions unde Secu i y Council esolu ions 731 (1992), 748 (1992) and 883 (1993). These esolu ions we e imposed because o Libya’s in ol emen in wo e o is bombings o ci ilian ai c a — Pan Am ligh 103 and UTA ligh 772 — and i s con inued suppo o in e na ional e o ism. By in oducing his d a esolu ion, Libya seeks o b eak ou o he in e na ional isola ion imposed by he wo ld communi y and o lend some legi imacy o i s campaign o end e o ism- ela ed sanc ions, including hose imposed by he Secu i y Council. These sanc ions, mos ecen ly e iewed his mon h, ha e been le in place wi hou change h ough 14 consecu i e e iews. Libya mus no be encou aged o belie e ha any hing less han ull compliance wi h Secu i y Council esolu ions can end i s con on a ion wi h he in e na ional communi y. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, pp. 20-21) 1998. “[…] The use o sanc ions as an e ec i e and app op ia e o eign policy ool by S a es, mul ila e al o ganiza ions and he Uni ed Na ions i sel is wo hy o discussion. Bu when i is aised in a condemna o y way in a body such as he Gene al Assembly o he Uni ed Na ions by a S a e ha does no espec Secu i y Council esolu ions, he subjec is unwo hy o he a en ion o Membe S a es. E e y so e eign S a e has he igh o decide wi h whom i will o will no ade. My Go e nmen ega ds economic sanc ions as a legi ima e ins umen o o eign policy. The Uni ed S a es is by no means he only na ion ha eso s o such measu es when necessa y. In ac , applying he logic o pa ag aph 2 o he d a esolu ion, he in e na ional communi y would ne e ha e imposed economic sanc ions agains he Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 82 Republic o Sou h A ica o o ce i o end he apa heid egime o agains wha was hen known as Rhodesia — wha is now Zimbabwe. When aced wi h unaccep able in e na ional beha iou , he Uni ed S a es eso s o unila e al economic ac ion eluc an ly. Whene e possible, we wo k wi h o he membe s o he global communi y o de ise a collec i e esponse o eg egious beha iou ha iola es in e na ional no ms o h ea ens in e na ional secu i y, as we did in he ace o I aq's a med agg ession agains i s neighbou , Kuwai . Bu he Uni ed S a es has esponded and will con inue o espond unila e ally when aced wi h policies and ac ions ha pose unusual and ex ao dina y h ea s o i s i al in e es s, including i s secu i y, such as S a e suppo o in e na ional e o ism, he p oli e a ion o weapons o mass des uc ion and o ballis ic missiles and massi e human igh s abuses. We do no ake such ac ion ligh ly. When o ced o ac , we make i clea wha policies we wan o see changed and wha he a ge S a e mus do o ha e sanc ions li ed. Ou sanc ions also seek o a ge he subjec Go e nmen , while a oiding ha m o ulne able ci ilian popula ions. […] We should also no e ha imposing economic sanc ions en ails eal economic sac i ice on he pa o he Uni ed S a es. Tha he Uni ed S a es is willing o make such sac i ices indica es he g ea impo ance we place on he issues in ol ed. In esponding o ogue S a e beha iou , he Uni ed S a es is de ending no only i s own in e es s bu he secu i y o he in e na ional communi y as a whole”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, pp. 16-17) 2002. “[…] Le me begin by saying ha economic measu es, including sanc ions, a e a legi ima e, app op ia e and e ec i e ool o add essing h ea s o in e na ional peace and secu i y. The Uni ed S a es is no alone in his iew o p ac ice. The Uni ed S a es uses sanc ions o add ess some o he mos abho en and des abilizing ac i i ies o ou ime. We use sanc ions o de e e o ism, p oli e a ion, a icking in pe sons, a icking in wildli e and a icking in d ugs. We use a ge ed sanc ions o add ess beha iou s ha h ea en ou secu i y and unde mine human digni y. In some cases, we use ou sanc ions because he e is no a enue o pu suing ac ion a he Uni ed Na ions, ei he because he e is no applicable au ho i y o because a mino i y o S a es a e obs uc ing he implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. The loudes p oponen s o he so-called unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e simul aneously obs uc he implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions and o en bla an ly iola e hem. In such cases, we and o he Membe S a es will wo k o add ess h ea s o peace and secu i y as bes we can wi hin he means a ou disposal. We would much p e e o see Uni ed Na ions sanc ions ully implemen ed and upda ed in line wi h he h ea s ha hey a e designed o de e . To echo wha ou colleagues om he Eu opean Union ha e said, Uni ed Na ions sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul, peace ul ools ha he in e na ional communi y has o add ess h ea s o in e na ional peace and secu i y. We suppo Wes e n Eu opean and o he S a es 83 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) hei use whene e app op ia e, and we wo k closely wi h in e na ional pa ne s in building he capaci y o Membe S a es o implemen Uni ed Na ions sanc ions ully and e ec i ely. In cases whe e Uni ed Na ions ac ion is no easible, he Uni ed S a es o en wo ks in andem wi h o he Membe S a es o implemen au onomous sanc ions o add ess h ea s o ou secu i y and alues. Sanc ions impose inancial cos s on co up ion and es ic he low o dual-use componen s o Go e nmen s ha a e wo king ha d o build weapons o mass des uc ion ha hey will use o menace hei neighbou s and, indeed, he en i e wo ld. We also use sanc ions o hold o accoun S a e ac o s who iola e he igh s o selec mino i ies, o women and o hei poli ical opponen s. Those ha s oke he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e con end ha au onomous sanc ions unde mine he p inciples o so e eign y and non-in e e ence. Ou au onomous sanc ions a e a ge ed and c a ed wi h a clea nexus o he Uni ed S a es. […] Some allege ha ou sanc ions ha m innocen s, when in ac we use ou sanc ions o a ge hose who obs uc he deli e y o humani a ian aid and hose who s ip hei ci izen y o weal h h ough co up ion. We use sanc ions o uphold he igh s o hose who canno de end hemsel es. The Uni ed S a es has aken conc e e ac ions o mi iga e any unin ended consequences o sanc ions domes ically and a he Uni ed Na ions. […]. Las ly, he Uni ed S a es apply sanc ions consis en wi h in e na ional law. Allow me o lea e you oday wi h one inal obse a ion: he Uni ed S a es has been he a ge o au onomous sanc ions by some o he mos oci e ous c i ics o so-called unila e al coe ci e measu es. They ha e ac ually sanc ioned us as well, which is he heigh o hypoc isy. These S a es aim o denig a e all sanc ions wi h his na a i e, which is designed o challenge he abili y o independen na ions o ensu e hei collec i e secu i y h ough he peace ul egula ion o hei own esou ces. We hope ha e e yone he e will see his poli ical hea e o wha i is. […]”. (A/78/PV.90, 13 June 2024, pp. 6-7) In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 84 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND GROUPS OF STATES Eu opean Union (EU) 1996. “The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o ei e a e i s ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis. We ha e also ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha in e na ional coe ci e measu es can be imposed on S a es only by, and unde he au ho i y o , he Secu i y Council, in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . In his ega d, we wish o men ion he legisla ion ha p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union ea i ms i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es ha appea o con a ene in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union mus , howe e , make a i m and unmis akable dis inc ion be ween measu es imposed unila e ally by indi idual S a es and hose ha a e unde aken wi h he ull au ho i y o he Secu i y Council, and in con o mi y wi h he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. […]”. (A/51/PV.67, 27 No embe 1996, p. 20) 1997. “Belgium, like i s pa ne s in he Eu opean Union, is opposed o he ex a e i o ial applica ion o na ional legisla ion, mo e pa icula ly he unila e al imposi ion o comme cial measu es, especially sanc ions. The Eu opean Union con i med his posi ion in i s explana ion o o e when he Gene al Assembly o ed on esolu ion 51/22, en i led ‘Elimina ion o coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion” on 27 No embe 1996’”. (A/52/343, 15 Sep embe 1997, p. 2) 1998. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun y, Cyp us, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun ies membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea — Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way — align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union wishes o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s unequi ocal ejec ion o a emp s o apply na ional legisla ion on an ex a e i o ial basis con a y o in e na ional law. We ha e always ejec ed a emp s by any coun y o coe ce o he s in o complying wi h unila e al comme cial measu es. We s ess ha binding sanc ions can be imposed on S a es only by and unde he au ho i y o he Secu i y Council in acco dance wi h A icle 41 o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e . In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es 85 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) We wish o men ion in his ega d he legisla ion which p o ides o he applica ion o legal sanc ions o companies and indi iduals ou side i s na ional ju isdic ion, including p o isions designed o discou age hi d-coun y companies om ading wi h o in es ing in speci ic coun ies. Measu es o his ype iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and he so e eign y o independen S a es. We wish o ea i m ha he Eu opean Union's s ong opposi ion, based bo h on law and on p inciple, o he imposi ion o seconda y boyco s and legisla ion wi h ex a e i o ial e ec and e oac i i y emains unchanged; and we wish o s a e ha he Eu opean Union has exe cised i s igh o eac as i deems app op ia e o any ex a e i o ial measu es which appea o con a ene in e na ional law, and i will con inue o do so. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 17) 2000. “I ha e he honou o ake he loo on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia and Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies, Cyp us, Mal a and No way, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . The Eu opean Union would like o ake his oppo uni y o emphasize i s ca ego ical ejec ion o all a emp s o apply na ional laws on an ex a e i o ial basis agains he na ionals o businesses o hi d S a es, which is con a y o in e na ional law. The Eu opean Union has always ejec ed such a emp s aimed a compelling o he coun ies o abide by economic measu es adop ed on a unila e al basis. […] Measu es o ha kind iola e he gene al p inciples o in e na ional law and o he so e eign y o independen S a es. The Eu opean Union is i mly opposed, bo h on legal g ounds and in p inciple, o he en o cemen o seconda y boyco s and unila e al laws wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s agains he na ionals o en e p ises o hi d S a es. We s ess ha we ese e ou igh o eac as we deem i o such measu es, which a e con a y o in e na ional law, and we shall con inue o do so. The Eu opean Union makes a clea and indispu able dis inc ion be ween unila e al measu es wi h ex a e i o ial e ec s on he one hand and o he kinds o economic coe ci e measu es ha a e legal unde in e na ional law, whe he hese a e adop ed by he Secu i y Council unde A icle 41 o he Cha e o by S a es o g oups o S a es, on he o he . […]”. (A/55/PV.41, 26 Oc obe 2000, p. 24) 2002. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union. The Cen al and Eas e n Eu opean coun ies associa ed wi h he Eu opean Union — Bulga ia, he Czech Republic, Es onia, Hunga y, La ia, Li huania, Poland, Romania, Slo akia, Slo enia — and he associa ed coun ies Cyp us, Mal a and Tu key, as well as he Eu opean F ee T ade Associa ion coun y membe o he Eu opean Economic A ea, Liech ens ein, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . We wish o e e o ou s a emen made on he adop ion o esolu ion 55/6 on 26 Oc obe 2000”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 11) 2024. “I ha e he honou o speak on behal o he Eu opean Union (EU) and i s membe S a es. The candida e coun ies Mon eneg o, Uk aine, he Republic o Moldo a, Bosnia and He zego ina and Geo gia, and he Eu opean F ee T ade In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 86 Associa ion coun ies Iceland, Liech ens ein and No way, membe s o he Eu opean Economic A ea, align hemsel es wi h his s a emen . Sanc ions ha e become a aul line in he Uni ed Na ions. They ha e been miscons ued by some and unjus ly blamed o ma e s o which hey a e no esponsible. […] Sanc ions a e a i al ool a ailable o he Secu i y Council o ensu e he main enance o in e na ional peace and secu i y. They suppo con lic esolu ion, such as in he case o he wo la es enewals o Libya and Sou h Sudan. They cons ain he p oli e a ion ac i i ies o he Democ a ic People’s Republic o Ko ea and he e o is h ea posed by he Islamic S a e in I aq and he Le an , Al-Qaida and hei a ilia es. They cu b he low o a ms and ammuni ion o he inancing o a med g oups in con lic si ua ions. In sho , sanc ions a e one o he mos powe ul peace ul ools o he in e na ional communi y. Language desc ibing sanc ions as “unila e al coe ci e measu es” can be misleading and is o en a poli ically mo i a ed a emp o di e a en ion away om he easons he sanc ions we e imposed in he i s place. Some o he loudes oices p omo ing he unila e al coe ci e measu es na a i e a e a he same ime obs uc ing he adop ion o implemen a ion o Uni ed Na ions sanc ions. […] Fo he EU, sanc ions a e necessa y o p ese e peace and secu i y and o de end in e na ional law, he ule o law and human igh s. The al e na i e would be non- ac ion in he ace o clea iola ions o in e na ional law and he inabili y o he Secu i y Council o ac .. […] The in e na ional communi y mus no igno e ins ances o human igh s iola ions o abuses, he imp isonmen o killing o human igh s de ende s, he supp ession o democ a ic opposi ion and ci il socie y o ganiza ions o he use o chemical weapons. Ou sanc ions aim o a ge hose esponsible o hese ansg essions. The EU global human igh s sanc ions egime applies o genocide, c imes agains humani y and o he se ious and sys ema ic human igh s iola ions o abuses. I a ge s hose who p o ide suppo o o a e o he wise in ol ed wi h people o en i ies commi ing such iola ions. EU sanc ions a e in ended o p ese e peace and suppo democ acy, he ule o law, human igh s and he p inciples o in e na ional law. They seek o p o ec he mos ulne able. The measu es a e a ge ed and ca e ully calib a ed, aimed a hose esponsible. EU sanc ions do no a ge he ci ilian popula ion. On he con a y, i is equen ly he ci ilian popula ion, human igh s de ende s and ci il socie y en i ies ha call o hose measu es. They also do no a ge he deli e y o humani a ian aid. Food, medicine and o he eme gency supplies a e exemp ed, by de aul , om EU sanc ions. […] EU sanc ions espec he igh s o he lis ed pe sons and en i ies, including due p ocess igh s. EU sanc ions designa ions a e based on speci ic lis ing c i e ia and equi e legally obus e idence. They always gi e easons o each lis ing so ha he indi idual o en i y conce ned unde s ands he g ounds o hei lis ing. Indi iduals, In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es 87 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) legal pe sons and S a es unde sanc ions may challenge hem be o e he Cou o Jus ice o he Eu opean Union. Some o hem ha e success ully done so. EU sanc ions a e empo a y in na u e. They a e subjec o egula e iew and a e p opo iona e o he g a i y o he si ua ion hey add ess. The e m “sanc ions” can ha e a nega i e conno a ion, as in layman’s e ms, a sanc ion is a penal y o punishmen . Howe e , sanc ions a e no puni i e. Tha is why he EU ea ies call hem es ic i e measu es. They es ic ce ain ac i i ies in o de o induce a change o conduc . Those es ic ions a e applied o EU ope a o s and wi hin he EU ju isdic ion. They do no c ea e obliga ions o non-EU ope a o s, unless hei business is conduc ed a leas pa ially wi hin he EU. As such, ou sanc ions do no ha e ex a e i o ial applica ion. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 7-9) G oup o 77 and China The G oup o 77 and China is o med by 134 S a es. 3 1998. “[…] he p ac ice o imposing unila e al coe ci e measu es o an ex a e i o ial na u e has acc ued addi ional se ious dimensions and i s impac can ha e de as a ing consequences o he a ec ed coun ies. Such p ac ices un coun e o he impe a i es o in e na ional coope a ion o de elopmen and o he spi i o pa ne ship being os e ed in he inc easingly in e dependen wo ld. Mo eo e , he imposi ion o such measu es by one coun y on ano he con a enes in e na ional law and is o ally incompa ible, no only wi h in e na ional ules and egula ions, bu also wi h he p inciples o equal so e eign y, non-in e en ion and non- in e e ence in he in e nal a ai s o so e eign S a es. As a esul , such coe ci e ac ions p e en he a ec ed coun ies om enjoying hei equal and non-disc imina o y igh s in pu suing de elopmen and om eely expanding hei in e na ional ade. […]”. (A/53/PV.43, 26 Oc obe 1998, p. 5) 2002. “[…] In adding ou suppo o he d a esolu ion, I would like o ei e a e he posi ion o he minis e s o he de eloping coun ies, exp essed in he Decla a ion issued on he occasion o he Twen y-Six h Annual Minis e ial Mee ing o he G oup 3 A ghanis an, Alge ia, Angola, An igua and Ba buda, A gen ina, Aze baijan, Bahamas, Bah ain, Bangladesh, Ba bados, Belize, Benin, Bhu an, Boli ia, Bo swana, B azil, B unei Da ussalam, Bu kina Faso, Bu undi, Cabo Ve de, Cambodia, Came oon, Cen al A ican Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Como os, Congo, Cos a Rica, Cô e d'I oi e, Cuba, Democ a ic People's Republic o Ko ea, Democ a ic Republic o he Congo, Djibou i, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuado , Egyp , El Sal ado , Equa o ial Guinea, E i ea, Eswa ini, E hiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, G enada, Gua emala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hai i, Hondu as, India, Indonesia, I an, I aq, Jamaica, Jo dan, Kenya, Ki iba i, Kuwai , Lao People's Democ a ic Republic, Lebanon, Leso ho, Libe ia, Libya, Madagasca , Malawi, Malaysia, Maldi es, Mali, Ma shall Islands, Mau i ania, Mau i ius, Mic onesia, Mongolia, Mo occo, Mozambique, Myanma , Namibia, Nau u, Nepal, Nica agua, Nige , Nige ia, Oman, Pakis an, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Pa aguay, Pe u, Philippines, Qa a , Rwanda, Sain Ki s and Ne is, Sain Lucia, Sain Vincen and he G enadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and P incipe, Saudi A abia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sie a Leone, Singapo e, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sou h A ica, Sou h Sudan, S i Lanka, S a e o Pales ine, Sudan, Su iname, Sy ian A ab Republic, Tajikis an, Thailand, Timo - Les e, Togo, Tonga, T inidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Tu kmenis an, Uganda, Uni ed A ab Emi a es, Uni ed Republic o Tanzania, U uguay, Vanua u, Venezuela, Vie Nam, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe. In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 88 o 77, held a New Yo k on 19 Sep embe 2002. Pa ag aph 42 o ha Decla a ion s a es: “We i mly ejec he imposi ion o laws and egula ions wi h ex a e i o ial impac and all o he o ms o coe ci e economic measu es, including unila e al sanc ions agains de eloping coun ies, and ei e a e he u gen need o elimina e hem immedia ely. We emphasize ha such ac ions no only unde mine he p inciples ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law, bu also se e ely h ea en he eedom o ade and in es men . We he e o e call on he in e na ional communi y nei he o ecognize hese measu es no apply hem”. […]”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 2) 2024. “[…] De eloping coun ies ace g ea challenges, including he inc ease in unila e al poli ical, economic and ade ac ions o policies and he weakening o mul ila e alism, which a e lag an iola ions o he p inciples es ablished in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions and in e na ional law and he pu poses o he Uni ed Na ions. We conside ha i is u gen o s op hose ac ions, which h ea en he economic and social de elopmen o he coun ies ha a e subjec o hem and consequen ly p e en hem om achie ing he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. The G oup conside s ha he applica ion o hose measu es, oge he wi h all unila e al p o ec ionis measu es, including a i and non- a i ba ie s, also iola e he ules o he Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion, unde mine he mul ila e al ading sys em and se iously h ea en ee ade, he igh o S a es o expo o impo goods o se ices om wo ld ma ke s, in es men and sus ainable de elopmen . Those measu es also cons i u e means o a bi a y disc imina ion agains de eloping coun ies subjec o hem. The impac o hose measu es also a ec s, among o he hings, echnical and inancial coope a ion; echnology ans e ; ag icul u al and indus ial p oduc ion in he coun ies; access o ood; he supply o medicines, accines, ea men s and medical equipmen o ea diseases, as occu ed du ing he co ona i us disease pandemic; and e en he pa icipa ion o delega ions in mee ings o he Uni ed Na ions sys em o o spo s delega ions wishing o a end in e na ional e en s. […] In conclusion, he G oup ca ego ically ejec s he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es and calls on he coun ies conce ned o e ain om imposing hem, including unila e al sanc ions and ade es ic ions, which nega i ely impac he human igh s o millions o people li ing unde hose illegal measu es in de eloping coun ies and in u n deepen he gap be ween hose coun ies and de eloped coun ies. Ins ead, hose coun ies mus show g ea e solida i y and coope a ion o suppo o he coun ies in o e coming he huge challenges and ulne abili ies hey ace in implemen ing he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable De elopmen and achie ing he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals, in compliance wi h he spi i o he Uni ed Na ions Cha e ”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 10-11) G oup o A ican S a es 2002. “[…] on behal o he A ican G oup […]: In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es 89 | Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) […] In spi e o he ac ha he Uni ed Na ions Cha e allows he O ganiza ion o use economic coe ci e measu es only in cases ha ep esen a h ea o in e na ional peace and secu i y, he implemen a ion o such means by some coun ies unila e ally is illegal, acco ding o he p o isions and no ms o in e na ional law. The Gene al Assembly has exp essed i s ejec ion o such measu es on many occasions and has adop ed a numbe o esolu ions ejec ing unila e al coe ci e economic measu es. These esolu ions emphasize he ac ha S a es should e ain om using ex a e i o ial laws which cons i u e a clea h ea o in e na ional coope a ion and o he undamen al p inciples on which he in e na ional inancial, ade and economic sys ems a e based. […] Such measu es no only unde mine he p inciples ensh ined in he Uni ed Na ions Cha e and in in e na ional law, bu also se iously h ea en he eedom o in es men s and ade, since e e y S a e has an inalienable igh o economic, social and cul u al de elopmen , and he igh o choose eely he poli ical, economic and social sys em ha is app op ia e o he p ospe i y o i s people and in acco dance wi h i s na ional plans and policies”. (A/57/PV.31, 16 Oc obe 2002, p. 6) 2024. “[…] Se e al Membe S a es in A ica ace unique challenges ha a e compounded by unila e al economic measu es. Those measu es signi ican ly unde mine ou collec i e e o s o achie e sus ainable de elopmen and widen he economic dispa i y be ween A ican na ions and he de eloped wo ld. Sanc ions lead o educed ma ke s, collapse o in as uc u e and inc eased ansac ion cos s o small businesses. Unila e al economic measu es ha e esul ed in subs an ial ade e enue losses o A ican coun ies, se e ely hampe ing ou p og ess owa ds achie ing he Sus ainable De elopmen Goals. The imposi ion o unila e al sanc ions and ade es ic ions se e ely a ec s ou economies, pa icula ly in a eas c i ical o ou de elopmen , such as ag icul u e, heal hca e and in as uc u e. Those measu es dis up supply chains, es ic access o essen ial goods and se ices and impede inancial and echnical coope a ion. […] A ica’s de elopmen elies hea ily on mul ila e alism and in e na ional coope a ion. Unila e al measu es no only iola e in e na ional law and he p inciples o he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions, bu hey also unde mine he global ading sys em, limi ing ou access o ma ke s and in es men oppo uni ies. The A ican G oup emphasizes ha hose unila e al measu es ha e a disp opo iona e impac on ou women and child en, who su e he mos om economic ins abili y and educed access o essen ial se ices. We s ess he impo ance o a ai and equi able ading sys em ha suppo s ou de elopmen al aspi a ions. […] The A ican G oup ca ego ically ejec s he applica ion o unila e al coe ci e measu es. We u ge all na ions o demons a e g ea e solida i y and coope a ion in o de o help us o e come his immense challenge we ace. We mus ensu e ha no one and no coun y is le behind in ou collec i e jou ney owa ds sus ainable de elopmen . The con inen has also been a he o e on o echnological inno a ion, wi h se e al na ions eme ging as ech hubs. Sanc ions and ade In e na ional o ganiza ions and g oups o s a es Elimina ion o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es… (1996-2024) | 96 e o s. Such ac ions con a ene he spi i and le e o in e na ional law, in inging upon he so e eign igh s o na ions o de e mine hei own poli ical, economic and social sys ems. We call upon all S a es o e ain om imposing unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es on any coun y and o esol e dispu es h ough dialogue, nego ia ion and peace ul means, in acco dance wi h in e na ional law. […] SADC ea i ms i s commi men o solida i y, coope a ion and mu ual espec among na ions, and his dialogue session is he e o e a i s s ep owa ds add essing any conce ns in a peace ul and amicable manne . We call o collec i e ac ion o elimina e he use o unila e al ex a e i o ial coe ci e economic measu es as a means o poli ical and economic compulsion. We also ea i m ou commi men o a mul ila e al sys em ounded on he p inciples o equali y, jus ice and espec o in e na ional law, as en isaged in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. We u ge he in e na ional communi y o ea i m i s commi men o mul ila e alism and he p inciples ensh ined in he Cha e o he Uni ed Na ions. I is impe a i e ha we uphold he p inciples o so e eign equali y, non-in e e ence and espec o e i o ial in eg i y. Unila e al coe ci e measu es, pa icula ly hose wi h ex a e i o ial each, a e incompa ible wi h hose p inciples and mus be unequi ocally ejec ed. […]”. (A/78/PV.89, 13 June 2024, pp. 9-10)