Appendix i
How sanctions have affected the Russian Economy and society?
Following its invasion of Ukraine and the imposition of U.S. and partners’ sanctions and other economic measures, Russia’s economy in 2022 contracted by 2.1 percent with record-high energy exports cushioning what would have been a far deeper contraction. Russia’s economy is over 5 percent smaller than had been predicted prior to the escalation, and it is far underperforming other energy exporters (including the United States). The war and associated multilateral sanctions are putting Russia’s economy under considerable economic strain, contributing to rapidly growing expenditures, a depreciating ruble, increasing inflation, and a tight labour market reflecting a loss of workers.Financial sanctions, export controls, the EU crude oil embargo, and the Price Cap on Russian oil imposed by the United States and its partners have made it harder for Russia's war industry to acquire high-tech components and other necessary intermediate inputs. The decline in Russia's growth in 2022 was mainly due to a 14 percent reduction in exports and an 11 percent decrease in imports compared to 2021, among other factors. Consequently, Russia has been forced to seek lower-quality substitutes from third countries, resulting in a costly reorganisation of its supply chains. Due to U.S. and partner sanctions and export controls that restrict its access to essential technologies, Russia has also had difficulty obtaining key inputs for its war. These advanced weapons cannot yet be domestically manufactured by Russia, and the United States and its partners are taking measures to ensure that it never does. As a result, Russia is more isolated and reliant on individuals and entities willing to resupply its military and perpetuate its heinous war against Ukraine.
An increase in people leaving Russia happened before the country's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. However, as the country mobilized for war in 2022, the trend of younger and educated people leaving for better opportunities abroad accelerated. This resulted in historic levels of emigration, with around 668,000 people leaving Russia in 2022, a 71 percent increase compared to the previous five-year average. This loss of human capital will have long-term effects and will further weaken Russia's growth potential. The Russian government is aware of this and is offering subsidized mortgages to skilled workers to encourage them to stay.
The Russian economy has also experienced volatility in its exchange rate, with the ruble falling then rising then falling again, now down roughly 20 percent against the dollar from early February 2022 to December 2023. This depreciation, while not a measure of the efficacy of sanctions, does impact Russia’s fiscal balance and has made Russia’s imports more expensive, which – alongside other restrictions imposed by the United States and its partners — make Russia’s ability to acquire war materials more difficult.
How does the Magnitsky Act work and how would it support stopping slide into authoritarianism?
The United States Congress passed the original Magnitsky Act in 2012 in response to the death of Russian tax advisor, Sergei Magnitsky, who was in custody in Moscow's Butyrka prison, and had uncovered a major tax fraud conspiracy. The Magnitsky Act authorised U.S. sanctions against Russians involved in Magnitsky’s brutal detention and those involved in human rights abuses against other activists.
The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (GloMag) was passed in 2016. Legislation has been enacted to grant the U.S. government the power to impose sanctions on individuals and entities worldwide who are involved in human rights violations and corruption. The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is responsible for enforcing and implementing the Global Magnitsky Act.
The OFAC has the authority to identify individuals and entities subject to sanctions under the act, freeze their assets within U.S. jurisdiction, and prohibit U.S. persons from engaging in transactions with them. The State Department also has a role in identifying individuals and entities that may be subject to sanctions under the act. The law was implemented by the executive branch in 2017 through the adoption of Executive Order (E.O.) 13818. This order created a sanctions program that covers a range of human rights abuses and acts of corruption worldwide. In 2022, the Act was permanently reauthorized.
Several other countries have passed their own versions of Magnitsky-style legislation, empowering them to impose similar sanctions on individuals who are involved in human rights violations and corruption. These countries include Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and several others. Although each jurisdiction has its own process for implementing and enforcing these sanctions, they are all based on the principles of global accountability for human rights violations and corruption.Legal Criteria: These sanctions can be imposed on foreign individuals and entities anywhere in the world that are responsible for or involved in
Serious human rights abuse
The term “serious human rights abuse” is not defined in law or regulation, but various international organisations and legal frameworks provide guidance on what constitutes such abuses. e.g Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): The UDHR, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, outlines fundamental human rights principles. Serious human rights abuses often violate the rights enshrined in the UDHR, including the right to life, liberty, and security of person; the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; and the right to a fair trial.
In practice, the United States government (USG) has applied GloMag to human rights abuses involving at least one incident of physical violence against one or more victims or a serious deprivation of liberty.Specifically, GloMag has most frequently been applied to killings, torture, and unlawful or arbitrary detentions. E.g In December 2019, the U.S. imposed Global Magnitsky Act sanctions on four Myanmar military leaders for their role in human rights abuses against Rohingya Muslims and other ethnic minorities in Myanmar's Rakhine, Kachin, and Shan States. These abuses included extrajudicial killings, torture, and arbitrary detentions.
GloMag sanctions have also been applied to gender-based violence, enforced disappearance, certain acts of human trafficking, and more.
Corruption
Corruption is not defined under Executive Order (E.O. 13818), but U.S. practice demonstrates that corruption must involve an improper exchange or provision of a benefit involving government actors or entities.
The E.O. provides illustrative examples of corruption such as misappropriation of state assets and bribery. The program has also covered government procurement, money laundering, and state capture.
Transferring the proceeds of corrupt acts is also sanctionable, even years after the original acts.
Other bases for sanctions include being leaders or officials of entities that have engaged in sanctionable acts; attempting such acts; or assisting perpetrators. Generally, the USG imposes these sanctions only in response to acts occurring in the last five years.
Process and Implementation
Penalties: These sanctions impose an entry ban and asset freeze on individuals or entities and are publicly announced. Sanctioned persons generally cannot obtain or keep a U.S. visa or access U.S.-based funds or property. Persons under U.S. jurisdiction cannot transact with them.
The US Treasury Department has the power to enforce these penalties, but it is not mandatory. The Treasury is required to work with the State and Justice Departments before implementing sanctions.
Congress has a role to play in the implementation of sanctions. If a member of Congress makes a request, the US government must evaluate and report on that particular sanction suggestion.
NGO involvement: The United States government (USG) is required by law to consider “credible information obtained by non governmental organisations that monitor violations of human rights” in implementing this program. The Treasury and State Departments accept and consider recommendation files from NGOs and periodically consult with NGOs that have submitted such information.
There are several ways in which the Magnitsky Act would enable more accountability and slow down the process of slide into authoritarianism;
Protecting Civil Society and Dissidents: Magnitsky sanctions can offer a level of protection for civil society activists, journalists, and political dissidents who may face persecution from authoritarian regimes. This threat may deter authoritarian leaders from targeting individuals who express dissenting views.
Promoting Transparency and Accountability: The Magnitsky Act encourages governments to investigate and publicly disclose information about individuals suspected of involvement in illicit or corrupt activities. This can lead to more transparency and accountability in governance and hold corrupt officials accountable.
Global Cooperation Against Authoritarianism: the Magnitsky Act has the potential to encourage international cooperation among countries that share similar values in addressing human rights abuses and authoritarian behavior. By coordinating diplomatic efforts and imposing sanctions, countries can exert greater pressure on authoritarian regimes to respect democratic principles and human rights.
Examples on Specific Country and People Cases
World Bank Aid Suspension to Uganda: In 2016, the World Bank suspended a $90 million loan to Uganda's health sector due to concerns over corruption and mismanagement within the country's Ministry of Health. The decision to suspend the loan was made to ensure that development assistance was used effectively and transparently, in line with democratic governance principles.
In July 2017, the U.S. sanctioned Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro under the Global Magnitsky Act for alleged corruption and human rights abuses. Any assets held by Nicolás Maduro within U.S. jurisdiction were frozen or blocked and U.S. persons and entities were prohibited from engaging in any transactions with Nicolás Maduro. Also, Maduro was prohibited from entering the United States. The sanctions contributed to increasing international pressure on the Maduro regime. Other countries, including members of the European Union and Latin American nations, also imposed sanctions or diplomatic measures against Maduro and his inner circle, amplifying the isolation of the Venezuelan government. Some argue that the sanctions may have had limited practical impact on Maduro's behaviour or the situation in Venezuela. Despite being barred from accessing U.S.-based assets and facing an entry ban, Maduro remained in power and continued to govern Venezuela.
3. How can constitutional amendments be implemented to ensure presidential term limits and maintain the rule of law? (specific country case of conversion to democracy)
Presidential term limits and the conditions surrounding them should be clearly and specifically outlined in constitutional amendments. Such conditions could include the number of terms a president can serve, the duration of each term, and any exceptions to term limits.
To prevent excessive accumulation of power by the president and maintain checks and balances within the political system, constitutional amendments must ensure a clear separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government.
The implementation of constitutional amendments should be subject to a transparent and democratic process that involves meaningful public participation, debate, and consultation. This will help build broad support for the amendments and strengthen their legitimacy.
Transitioning from authoritarian regimes to democracies is a complex process that has many dimensions. The process varies depending on a country's historical, political, social, and economic context. Though there is no universal approach, transitions towards democracy often involve similar components and phases.
Democratic transitions usually occur after a crisis or event that weakens the authoritarian government's legitimacy or stability. These events may include economic downturns, military defeats, shifts in global geopolitical dynamics, or mass protests. The emergence of a widespread demand for political reforms and greater freedoms is a crucial factor in democratic transitions. To challenge the ruling regime's authority and demand democratic reforms, civil society organisations, opposition groups, labour unions, student movements, and other grassroots actors may mobilise.
Case of Spain:
Spain's Transition period followed the death of Franco and was marked by political opening and reform, known as "La Transición." This process included negotiations between representatives of the Franco regime, members of the government and military, and representatives of the opposition, such as political parties, labour unions, and civil society organisations.
A new democratic constitution was a crucial aspect of the transition, and the Spanish Constitution of 1978 was drafted and approved to establish the framework for democracy. This constitution enshrined principles such as the rule of law, separation of powers, and respect for human rights and created a parliamentary monarchy with a bicameral legislature consisting of the Congress of Deputies and the Senate.
The principle of the division of powers was incorporated into the Spanish Constitution of 1978, essential for maintaining checks and balances within the political system. The constitution established separate branches of government, including the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, each with its own distinct powers and responsibilities.
4. How Hungary, Slovakia, Turkey, China, and India have individually started "sliding" into authoritarianism?
Hungary:
The Alliance of Young Democrats-Hungarian Civic Union (Fidesz), led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, has been in power since the 2010 elections. During this time, they have implemented legal and constitutional changes that have enabled them to gain control over independent institutions in the country.
The policies of the Fidesz government have been anti-LGBT+ and antimigrant. They have also passed laws that make it difficult for opposition groups, journalists, universities, and NGOs critical of the ruling party to operate freely. This has resulted in the deterioration of the quality of the democratic institutions in Hungary, according to the latest Freedom House Nations in Transit Report.
In fact, the quality of democratic institutions in Hungary is rated poorer than in countries such as Albania, Serbia, or Northern Macedonia, according to the same report. Freedom House has declared that Hungary has not been a democracy since 2020. Overall, Hungary is rated as Partly Free in the Freedom in the World 2024 report, which is Freedom House's annual study of political rights and civil liberties worldwide
Turkey:
In 2002, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's Justice and Development Party (AKP) won the general election with a large majority. Erdoğan outlined the AKP's objectives, which differed from those of previous pro-Islamic parties; the AKP advocated for a pro-European, market-friendly, liberal, and democratic form of conservatism. The AKP's "civilisation agenda" was in line with Turkey's candidacy for EU membership, and was welcomed by Turkey's influential business groups, liberal intelligentsia, and international media outlets who aspired for "democratic consolidation."
However, since the AKP's third consecutive victory in 2011, Turkish politics has become increasingly associated with democratic regression rather than consolidation, with international media labelling Turkey as authoritarian, especially following the 2013 Gezi Park Protests and the failed coup attempt in 2016. In 2017, Erdoğan's referendum victory transformed the parliamentary system into a presidential one.
Despite being located in Europe, Turkey remains one of the most difficult places in the region to freely express oneself. In 2019, Turkey maintained its position as the world's worst jailer of professional journalists, and many others, including writers, civil society activists, artists, political figures, and marginalised community leaders, continue to face significant challenges in exercising their rights to free speech and expression.
China:
China's leaders have shifted their stance from defending their governance system from external criticism to promoting it as worthy of emulation by other countries. This new form of Chinese assertive authoritarianism aims to align the policy choices of other nations and the norms and values embodied in international institutions with China's policy preferences. As a result, it challenges the ideals of liberal democracy, including individual freedoms, the rule of law, and transparency and accountability.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) continues to exert tighter control over all aspects of life and governance, such as the state bureaucracy, media, online speech, religious practice, universities, businesses, and civil society associations. Xi Jinping, the CCP leader and state president, won a third term as party leader in October 2022, thereby further consolidating personal power to a degree not seen in China for decades.
The increased control has inevitably affected political rights and civil liberty. According to the Freedom House report, China's Political Rights score is -2/40, while its Liberty Rights score is -11/60.
India:
India has a multiparty democracy, however, the Muslim population has been affected by discriminatory policies and an increase in persecution under the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The constitution guarantees civil liberties, including freedom of expression and religion. However, the harassment of journalists, NGOs, and government critics has significantly increased under Modi's administration.
The BJP has been using government institutions more frequently to target political opponents. The social and economic marginalisation of Muslims, scheduled castes (Dalits), and scheduled tribes (Adivasis) persists. According to Freedom House's annual study of political rights and civil liberties worldwide, India is rated Partly Free in Freedom in the World 2024.
Slovakia:
The winner of the presidential election held in Slovakia on Saturday, April 6, 2024 was the pro-Russian Prime Minister Robert Fico. Peter Pellegrini, the candidate he supported, won with over 53% of the vote. This shows that a majority of the 5.5 million inhabitants of the country support the government's authoritarian policies and its emulation of Viktor Orban's policies in Hungary.
While the presidential office in Slovakia is largely ceremonial, the head of state can still have an impact on political appointments and propose legislation for parliamentary review. Unfortunately, democratic institutions in Slovakia have been hampered by discrimination against Roma and growing political hostility towards migrants and refugees. Corruption in politics is also a problem. This significant change in leadership could have an impact on the democracy and freedom levels in Slovakia.
As of now, Slovakia is rated as Free in Freedom in the World 2024, which is Freedom House's annual study of political rights and civil liberties worldwide.