 |
| Picture Credit: Interpol |
The UN Security Council first imposed sanctions on Afghanistan in October 1999 with Resolution 1267, to force the Taliban, the de facto government of Afghanistan, to hand over the terrorist Osama bin Laden to the "appropriate authorities." Bin Laden had been indicted by the United States.
In December 2000, after strong pressure from the United States and Russia, the Security Council strengthened the sanctions. The new sanctions were imposed despite an August 2000 report from the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which highlighted the "tangible negative effect" on Afghanistan's populace of the existing sanctions. Another draft OCHA report underlined that "no poor country has ever been sanctioned the way Afghanistan has."
After the September 11, 2001 attacks the Security Council became more aware of Al-Qaeda's capabilities and intentions, and developed a unique sanctions regime to apply to the challenges posed by international terrorism. In an unprecedented development, the Security Council passed a number of resolutions approving "targeted" sanctions on alleged members and associates of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. These targeted sanctions took into account the transnational nature of terrorist networks. It was also in response to earlier concerns that general sanctions hurt innocent civilians. The Security Council attempted to use travel bans, asset freezes and arms embargoes to selectively defeat alleged terrorists and their co-conspirators. However, concerns from the human rights community raised new controversies over the use of targeted sanctions.
Although the Security Council seemed to have sufficiently accounted for humanitarian concerns, the human rights community argued that these sanctions violated the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual. In particular, legal scholars and human rights activists pointed out that sanctions targeted at individuals denied these people due process. Furthermore, numerous individuals who felt that they were mistakenly targeted by the UN sanctions found that there was no mechanism to have themselves removed from the list of targeted individuals. The fact that the Council initially provided no justification for listing targeted individuals shrouded the debate in secrecy.
On December 17, 2009, the Security Council passed Resolution 1904 creating the Office of the Ombudsperson of the Security Council’s 1267 Committee. The new position would serve as an independent and impartial person that could review the cases of any individuals on the sanctions list and present a report to the Committee on whether the person should remain on the sanctions list. The creation of the position was aimed at rectifying the lack of due process. The mandate for the Ombudsperson was extended on June 17, 2011 with Resolution 1989 through December 2012.
In May and June of 2011, the 1267 Committee approved the deletion of several individuals and entities from the lists. Most of these petitioners had worked with the Ombudsperson to have their case reviewed. While some of these individuals have been removed, the process of reviewing the individual sanctions is ongoing.
GPF Perspective | UN Document | Listing and De-Listing | General Articles |Links and Resources
GPF Perspective
On the Long Road Towards Security Council Accountability: Assessing and Renewing the Ombudsperson (June 2011)
This paper by GPF Associate Nicol Herbert sees the new sanctions Ombudsperson as a unique step towards legal oversight of the Security Council. For the first time, there is some degree of due process for individuals blacklisted by the 1267 Al Qaeda-Taliban sanctions committee. Based on a year of practice and comments by the Ombudsperson herself, the paper recommends a number of changes to make the office more responsive to legal standards of due process and more effective at delivering justice. (Global Policy Forum)
UN Documents
UN Security Council Resolutions
A list of Security Council Resolutions taking action against Al Qaeda and the Taliban is available here. The resolutions, each of which is available in .pdf format and is accompanied by a summary, are organized chronologically. External links related to certain resolutions are embedded in the text. There is also a list of the individuals and entities on the sanctions list.
Information Package on the work of the Al-Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee
Al-Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee, established pursuant to Resolution 1267 (also known as the "1267 Committee"), has a mandate to monitor and report
Report of the Secretary General on the Humanitarian Implications of Sanctions in Afghanistan (December 18, 2001)
The report concludes that years of civil war, human rights abuses, and three years of drought are the primary causes of human suffering in Afghanistan, with UN sanctions imposed in 1999 and 2000 playing only a secondary role.
2nd Report of the Secretary General on the Situation in Afghanistan (July 13, 2001)
The report of Secretary General acknowledges that the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated while the country has been under sanctions, but it refrains from attributing blame to the sanctions.
Report of the Secretary General on the Situation in Afghanistan (April 19, 2001)
Kofi Annan warns of the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Afghanistan, but states that UN sanctions are not responsible for the current situation.
UN press release on Resolution 1333 (December 19, 2000)
This press release includes summaries of ambassadors' statements.
Listing and De-Listing
UN Drops Taliban Names from Sanctions List (July 17, 2011)
The UN sanctions committee has removed the names of fourteen former Afghan Taliban leaders from an international blacklist. The UN imposed these sanctions in 1999 when the Taliban was in power and expanded them after the 9/11 attacks. President Hamid Karzai’s government spearheaded this initiative, aimed at supporting reconciliation in Afghanistan as well as peace and stability. However, this is far from the 50 names that the Afghan government wanted to see removed. There are still 123 names on the Taliban sanctions list. (Greater Kashmir)
US Seeks to Split UN Taliban, Qaeda Sanctions List (June 13, 2011)
The US is moving to split the list of sanctioned individuals on the 1267 Taliban-Al Qaeda sanctions committee as a means of encouraging the Taliban into peace talks. Despite the public statement that this would serve as a means of encouraging the Taliban to break from Al Qaeda, the split would merely continue the sanctions regime without actually making any changes. (Reuters Africa)
Afghans Want Taliban Dropped from Sanctions List (June 7, 2011)
Members of the Afghan government are asking for a group of Taliban members to be taken off the UN Security Council’s sanction list as a means of facilitating reconciliation within Afghanistan. Despite the appeal from the Afghan government, German Ambassador Peter Wittig, chair of the sanctions committee, says that it is unlikely that all of the individuals in this case will be taken off the list. Removing people from the sanctions list requires a unanimous decision from the Security Council, which is unlikely to happen given opposition from some Council members. (AFP)
UN Asset-Freezing Scheme Represents an ‘Atrocious Lack' of Due Process (August 25, 2010)
The asset-freezing sanctions regime operates under international law and requires all states to freeze the assets of individuals listed by the Security Council. Lack of due process is inherent in this regime. Almost 300 individuals have had their assets frozen for the past nine years without review. These individuals are unable to challenge the evidence against them and are given no indication of how to be removed from the list. Despite a recent review of asset-freezing sanctions by a Security Council subcommittee, the future remains bleak for listed individuals. (Guardian)
Court Challenge of UN No-Fly List to Proceed Despite Canadian UN Ombudsman (August 8, 2010)
In June, the UN Security Council appointed an ombudsperson, Kimberly Prost, to respond to widespread criticisms of its "anti-terrorist" sanctions regime that targets individuals. Despite Prost's appointment, two civil liberties groups in Canada will proceed with their lawsuit against the Canadian government. They are asking the Federal Court of Canada to strike down Canadian regulations that implement Security Council Resolution 1267 on the grounds that the appeal process for listed individuals lacks basic protections of procedural fairness that are fundamental to the rule of law. Thus, despite the ombudsperson appointment, there are still no guarantees of transparency in the listing and delisting process.(Postmedia News)
The United States and the UN's Targeted Sanctions of Suspected Terrorists: What Role for Human Rights? (June 2010)
In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Security Council passed a resolution requiring member states to impose targeted sanctions on alleged members of terrorist organizations. The policy raises serious concerns about the violation of human rights. Many who believed they were wrongly listed by the Council brought their cases to national and regional courts, and their successes challenge the credibility and legitimacy of the sanctions regime. In response to criticism from a variety of sources, the Security Council has partially reformed the policy, but national security still seems to come at the expense of human rights. (Ethics and International Affairs)
Human Rights Standards for Targeted Sanctions (January 2010)
Sanctions experts David Cortright and Erika de Wet, writing for the Fourth Freedom Forum's Sanctions and Security Research Program, argue in this paper that sanctions targeted at individuals violate fundamental human rights as enshrined in documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. In particular, these sanctions deny individuals the right to a fair hearing, the right to judicial review and he right to be heard. Although the Security Council has created important de-listing, petition, and review mechanisms, these are still insufficient to remedy the problems that legal scholars have identified in the targeted sanctions regime. Cortright and de Wet argue that the targeted sanctions controversy may undermine the legitimacy of efforts to prevent acts of terrorism, for this controversy is an example of how authorities have curtailed fundamental freedoms in favour of "security".
Targeted Sanctions and Due Process (March 20, 2006)
Legal scholar Bardo Fassbender prepared this report for the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs. Fassbender surveys international law to determine whether the UN's targeted sanctions regime is illegal under inernational law. He notes that while the UN itself is not party to any international human rights treaties, and although UN member states' ratification of such treaties in no way binds the UN as an organization, the UN Charter does enshrine certain human rights. Furthermore, supranational human rights standards are emerging - for example, in the EU - and expectations are that international organizations respect human rights as well. Therefore, the Security Council must weigh its obligation to maintain global peace and security with the supreme need to respect the rights of the individual. In conclusion, he recommends a number of particular rights that the Security Council should respect.
The Security Council's Targeted Sanctions Regime: In Need of Better Protection of the Individual (December 2007)
This Leiden Journal of International Law article notes that the Security Council's targeted sanctions contain serious procedural flaws. The Council can arbitrarily place individuals on a sanctions list, without giving them access to evidence against them or the right to appeal. The article recommends that the UN establish an independent and impartial sanctions organ, with the power to review petitions for delisting.
General Articles
2008 |2006 |2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002
2008
Terrorism Financing Blacklist at Risk (November 2, 2008)
European countries are no longer supporting the UN Security Council blacklist for al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. This is because the European Court of Justice- as well as national courts- decided that the list does not comply with international human rights standards. Because persons on the list do not have the right to see the evidence against them, they risk placement on the blacklist for political reasons. The UN charter allows neither a court nor independent experts to review the Security Council's decisions. (Washington Post)
The UN Security Council Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee: Emerging Principles of International Institutional Law for the Protection of Individuals (November 1, 2008)
The Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee freezes personal assets and applies travel bans and arms embargoes to individuals who Security Council members accuse of supporting terrorist organizations. Once these individuals are ‘blacklisted', it is very difficult to remove them from the list and lift the sanctions if they prove their innocence. This German Law Journal argues that the Council members possibly use sanctions at the international level to escape national standards of human rights protection and judicial review.
2006
Afghanistan's Anti-Narcotics Strategy (August 29, 2006)
According to the 2005 statistics from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, the cultivation of opium in Afghanistan significantly increased, accounting for 87 percent of world production despite the Afghan government's National Drug Control Strategy. This Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies article points out that the Taliban insurgency encourages narcotic production to fund its activities. "The lucrative nature of the Afghan opium trade that links cultivators, traffickers and consumers is one of the biggest threats to effective nation-building and regional stability," the author says.
2005
UN Report Warns of More Terrorists (September 20, 2005)
A UN report warns that Al Qaeda's operations have expanded to comprise new recruits skilled in urban warfare and suicide bombings. The report recommends that the Security Council broaden the arms embargo to keep this "third generation" of followers from obtaining military-quality materials or using chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. "UN sanctions need to be updated to keep up with the changing terrorist tactics." (Associated Press)
US Seeks to Firm Up Terrorist Sanctions (July 14, 2005)
The United States has circulated a draft resolution at the United Nations that aims to make UN sanctions against al-Qaeda and the Taliban more effective. The resolution clarifies the definition of those "associated with" target groups, to try and close loopholes which permit states to avoid taking action. It would also set up a monitoring team to assess national implementation of the sanctions regime and punish offenders. Such measures could help make UN sanctions a vital and effective weapon against terrorism. (Associated Press)
2004
Al-Qaeda Sanctions 'Ineffective' (August 27, 2004)
A UN committee says sanctions on Al-Qaeda, including asset freezing and arms control, have been ineffective. Al-Qaeda has been flexible in circumventing Security Council actions and often operates cheaply and with arms not covered by sanctions. The committee recommends reforming Security Council methods for dealing with terrorism. (BBC)
UN Dissolves Panel Monitoring Al Qaeda (February 2, 2004)
The UN Security Council has dissolved the expert panel in charge of monitoring sanctions against Al Qaeda and replaced it with a "more professional body." Michael Chandler, the former panel's chair, argues that the dismissal results from "pressure from influential UN members who had been singled out in his reports for failing to take adequate measures to combat Al Qaeda." (Washington Post)
Most UN Members Lag on Drive Against Al Qaeda (January 13, 2004)
Only 93 out the 191 UN members have filed their reports as required by the Security Council, complains the sanctions Committee on Al Qaeda/Talibans. While the Council prepares to vote on a new resolution to pressure non-complying members, France wants to renew the sanctions regime annually, whereas Washington wants the Al Qaeda sanctions to remain in place until the Council decides otherwise. (Reuters)
2003
Al-Qaida, Taliban Money Laundering 'More Sophisticated' - UN Panel Chair (October 15, 2003)
The chairman of the Security Council sanction committee on Al-Qaida and the Taliban reports that Al-Qaida circumvents sanctions by using couriers and non-standard banking arrangements to move money. The chairman also reported strong suspicions that the Taliban exchanges drugs for cash. (UN News Centre)
Report Says UN Embargo Does Little to Halt Al Qaeda (June 20, 2003)
Travel and arms sanctions issued by the Security Council against Al Qaeda have not greatly impeded the mobility and activity of individual members. This failure highlights the difficulty of imposing sanctions against a well-established but elusive network. (Washington Post)
2002
Bid to Stop Funds for Qaeda Hits Obstacles (August 29, 2002)
"Al Qaeda is by all accounts 'fit and well' and poised to strike again at its leisure," states the UN Panel responsible for monitoring sanctions against Al Qaeda. The report outlines the obstacles obstructing the task of blocking Al-Qaeda's funding. (Washington Post)
UN Monitors Warn of Afghan Missiles (January 24, 2002)
In a report to the Security Council, the head of the UN committee monitoring sanctions against the Taliban warns that members of al Qaeda may possess missiles capable of delivering conventional or chemical weapons. The Council has not formally responded to the report. (Washington Post)
UN Gives Green Light to Afghan Bank (January 16, 2002)
The Security Council's committee monitoring sanctions against Afghanistan removed the Da Afghanistan Bank, the country's central financial institution, from its list of groups and individuals whose assets have been ordered frozen because of links to Osama bin Laden's terrorist operation. (Associated Press)
US Plans Release of $221 Million in Afghan Assets (January 15, 2002)
The Security Council prepares to lift a flight ban on Ariana Airlines, the Afghan state airline, to accelerate the transfer of Taliban-controlled assets to the new Afghan government. (Washington Post)
Afghan Sanctions Outlive Usefulness (January 10, 2002)
With the removal of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Security Council is now discussing the repeal of diplomatic, economic, and travel sanctions imposed on the country two years ago. (Interpress Service)
US to Ask UN for Continuing Afghan Sanctions (January 08, 2002)
The US is calling the Security Council to update Resolution 1333 imposing sanctions against the Taliban to "reflect changes in the situation" in Afghanistan. (Washington Times)
Links and Resources
Office of the Ombudsperson
The website for the Office of the Ombudsperson, Kimberly Prost.The Security Council Committee on Al Qaeda and the Taliban
Also known as the "1267 Committee", this committee was created by the Security Council to monitor the implementation of UN sanctions enforced against members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in resolutions pursuant to Security Council Resolution 1267. The 1267 Committee has debated and analyzed the legal issues pertaining to the use of targeted sanctions, and provides excellent reports on the most minute of matters. For more information on the 1267 Committee, visit our Terrorism page linked above.
Targeted Sanctions Project at the Watson Institute, Brown University
The Watson Institute provides in-depth analysis and research on the use of targeted sanctions by the UN Security Council. The Institute also produces valuable statistics on the use of targeted sanctions.
Targeted Sanctions Bibliography
The Watson Institute has also produced this bibliography, which lists essential reading on the the topic of targeted sanctions. The list of external links at the end of this bibliography is particularly extensive.
The Fourth Freedom Forum's Sanctions and Security Research Project
The Sanctions and Security Research Project provides analysis and policy recommendations for sanctions regimes, directed at both unilateral and UN sanctions. Eminent scholars David Cortright and George Lopez are associated with Fourth Freedom, and updates on their work are provided through this website.
