Human rights sanctions hardly used against trade partners, parliament inquiry suggests

A parliamentary committee is all but accusing the federal government of playing favourites with how it uses sanctions against other countries over human rights, amid suggestions that it is going easy on people from those nations that are sizeable trade partners with Australia.

The Human Rights Subcommittee of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has published its report into the operation of amendments made by the Autonomous Sanctions Amendment (Magnitsky-style and Other Thematic Sanctions) Act 2021.

Magnitsky-style laws allow the government to sanction overseas-based individuals and entities involved in human rights abuses and corruption.

They allow Australia to apply sanctions by freezing assets, restricting financial transactions, and imposing travel bans on foreign people and businesses without going after governments.

Some submissions to the inquiry have suggested the government is refusing to use the sanctions throughout the Asia-Pacific because it is afraid of losing vital trade partnerships.

The committee’s report appears to offer some qualified agreement.

“The committee welcomes the legislation of Australia’s thematic sanctions framework in accordance with its recommendations of 2020,” it states.

“This expanded framework complements Australia’s pre-existing multilateral and autonomous sanctions regimes, and holds real promise in tackling human rights abuses, curbing serious corruption, and addressing other issues of international concern around the world.

“Nevertheless, the committee is concerned that Australia’s thematic sanctions do not yet live up to their full promise and considers there to be areas in which this framework can and should be strengthened.”

The subcommittee chair, Labor MP Maria Vamvakinou stated: “Sanctions can and do play a vital role in tackling human rights abuses, curbing serious corruption, and addressing other issues of international concern.

“Recent legislative developments have strengthened Australia’s sanctions framework.

“But as this review makes clear, there are opportunities for us to have an even greater global impact through our use of autonomous sanctions.”

The Vietnamese Overseas Initiative for Conscience Empowerment Australia (VOICE) is one group urging Australia to use its ability to impose sanctions more effectively.

In its submission to the inquiry, VOICE used human rights abuses in the region, including Vietnam, as an example of what it says is Australia going easy on trade partners.

“Governments are using force, harassment and violence against any opposition or dissenting voices on their country’s human rights issues and civil unrest,” it says.

“For instance, Vietnam, one of Australia’s trading partners, has increasingly detained and charged human rights, civil rights defenders and journalists under vague charges…

“As one of Australia’s trading partners, Australia should work with the Vietnamese government to improve the human rights situation in Vietnam.

“Australia must include the protection of human rights and labour rights in our trade agreements with our trading partners to ensure that our values are respected.

“Only when countries such as Vietnam uphold human rights, the rule of law and the rules-based international order can we truly see peace and prosperity in our region.”

DFAT told the committee there has been a “massive global step–up” in terms of the range, the number and the creativity of sanctions.

However, the geopolitical environment in which Australia imposes sanctions has become more complex.

“It noted the use of thematic sanctions relative to other autonomous sanctions had ‘steadily increased’ since the passing of the Amending Act,” the report states.

“DFAT also stated that efforts to contravene and avoid sanctions had grown, as had opposition to the use of autonomous sanctions internationally.”

The parliamentary report makes five recommendations aimed at strengthening Australia’s autonomous sanctions framework, including that:

• sanctions decisions be accompanied by detailed reasoning
• reasons for sanctions decisions be included in the Consolidated List of sanctioned individuals and entities
• the parliament receive an annual report on sanctions decisions taken during the previous year
• the regulations for imposing autonomous sanctions be updated to include listing criteria for all thematic areas, and
• a humanitarian exemption be legislated to ensure humanitarian assistance is not adversely affected by the imposition of sanctions.

The report also details the birth of the Magnitsky movement against human rights abuses.

“American financier Sir William Browder KCMG hired Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky in 2005 to investigate corrupt business practices in Russia,” it says.

“During his investigation, Mr Magnitsky allegedly uncovered large-scale tax fraud.

“He was subsequently arrested, tortured, and died in 2009 whilst still in custody.

“Since Mr Magnitsky’s death, Sir William Browder has led the global Magnitsky movement, advocating for targeted visa bans and asset freezes to be imposed on human rights abusers and highly corrupt officials around the world.”