The Global Magnitsky Sanctions target corruption and serious human rights abuse worldwide, without need for a U.S. jurisdictional nexus. MassPoint’s Global Magnitsky FAQs answers frequently asked questions about the Global Magnitsky Sanctions program (GloMag).
Hdeel Abdelhady discussed the critical minerals, national security, and supply chains nexus in this American Bar Association program.
OFAC Sanctions Paraguayan Tobacco Firm Ties to Sanctioned Ex-President By Hdeel Abdelhady The Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) re-imposed sanctions on…
The imposition of Global Magnitsky anti-corruption sanctions on two Cambodian related to the Ream Naval Base is strategically significant in the context of U.S. concerns about China’s activities and influence in Cambodia.
The United States has targted a Belt& Road project with Global Magnitsky Sanctions. The move is significant, and might signal a ratcheting up of U.S. opposition to the BRI, which has largely comprised rhetoric, diplomatic lobbying, and relatively tepid competition, such as by the establishment of the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC).
The Treasury Department’s announcement of the sanctions speaks to the foreign policy and geostrategic significance of the UDG sanctions action. The release speaks of China’s “malign” investment in Cambodia, its use of the UDG projects in Cambodia to “advance ambitions to project power globally,” “disproportionality benefit” itself through BRI projects, and concerns that the Dara Kakor project “could be converted to “host military assets.” The Treasury Department’s language echoes U.S. concerns about the BRI and other Chinese international project financing activities, including that China engages in “debt trap” financing.
With the adoption of the Global Magnitsky Sanctions, the United States added a powerful weapon to its already formidable legal arsenal. This publication provides an overview of the Global Magnitsky Sanctions.
Now that the Trump Administration has declared a policy to reduce dependency on foreign sources for critical minerals, how will the Administration go about achieving its stated objective? What legal consequences—including in the areas of national security, trade, anti-corruption, and environmental law—might flow? Our multi-disciplinary panel will discuss the science and practical importance of “critical minerals,” recent and potential U.S. legal and policy developments, and the potential impacts of U.S. actions on minerals on manufacturing, supply chains, and the markets.
Some Congress members are lobbying the Administration to impose human rights sanctions on Chinese officials and companies responsible for or complicit in abuses against China’s Uighur Muslim minority and other minorities. Two companies named, Dahua Technology and Hikvision, are very large, China-based global firms that produce surveillance products and systems. The bottom line is that the tech industry should take note of the development (even if no sanctions are imposed), as it foreshadows the legal and reputation risk issues they will, without doubt, face in connection with tech-enabled abuses, privacy encroachments, and other conduct by consumers of tech products and services.