CAB raises doubts over proposed new 'Magnitsky law' aiming to seize assets of human rights abusers

The Criminal Assets Bureau acknowledged the “positive intentions” in the bill, but said that providing sufficient evidence to meet a legal standard would be challenging.

Speaking at the Oireachtas justice committee, a representative of the Criminal Assets Bureau said the bill presupposes the existence of an 'identifiable category of assets'.

The Criminal Assets Bureau has identified problems with implementing proposed new laws seeking to seize assets linked to human rights abusers.

The Proceeds of Crime (Gross Human Rights Abuses) Bill 2020 was introduced by Labour TD Brendan Howlin as a means of seizing the assets of Russian individuals linked to human rights abuses in Ukraine.

The bill is known as Magnitsky legislation, which allows governments to sanction foreign individuals who have committed human rights abuses or are involved in significant corruption.

Mr Howlin sought to amend the Proceeds of Crime Acts 1996 to 2016 to enable CAB to target the assets of these individuals in Ireland.

Former Labour TD Brendan Howlin. Picture: Leah Farrell / RollingNews.ie

However, in a hearing before the Oireachtas justice committee, CAB said that while it acknowledged the “positive intentions” in the bill, it was concerned they may not be realised.

It said its powers are against the property as opposed to the person in control of the assets.

“This has significant implications when in the context of the EU Restrictive Measures against Russia and Belarus, which seeks to freeze assets on the basis of the identity of their owner and not on the basis of its provenance," it said.

"It appears that the bill, at least in part, seeks to confiscate assets seized under the Restrictive Measures.” 

'Insurmountable' challenges

The bureau said the bill presupposes the existence of an “identifiable category of assets” acquired by human rights abuses. It said it had “significant doubt” as whether such a category of assets exists.

It said the evidential challenge of proving the occurrence of criminality in an uncooperative jurisdiction would likely render the chances of Ireland successfully confiscating such assets “insurmountable”.

The Department of Justice said that under Magnitsky legislation, a determination may be made “at a political level” to freeze the assets of a person linked to human rights abuses.

It said such an approach does not require legal proof that the person committed abuse or that the assets derived from such abuses.

“This political approach is distinct from the judicial one taken in this bill which hopes to use proceeds-of-crime legislation,” it said.  

Seizures would be based on a court finding on a legal standard that an asset results from conduct which is both criminal in Ireland and a gross human rights abuse."

It said there was a “major practical challenge” in providing sufficient evidence to meet a legal standard.