Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made on 3 June 2019:

MINISTERIAL DECISION REFERENCE: MD-ER-2019-0032
DECISION SUMMARY TITLE: Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-
DECISION SUMMARY AUTHOR:	Head of International Compliance	IS THE DECISION SUMMARY PUBLIC OR EXEMPT? (if exempt state clause from Code of Practice booklet and from 1st January 2015 stating the relevant article/paragraph of the Freedom of Information Law/Regulations)		Public
REPORT TITLE: Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-
REPORT AUTHOR OR NAME OF PERSON GIVING REPORT: (if different from Decision Summary Author)	Head of International Compliance	IS THE REPORT PUBLIC OR EXEMPT? (if exempt state clause from Code of Practice booklet and from 1st January 2015 stating the relevant article/paragraph of the Freedom of Information Law/Regulations)		Public
DECISION AND REASON FOR THE DECISION: The Minister for External Relations approved for lodging “au Greffe” the Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201- (the “Amendment”). Article 3(4)(c) of the Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Jersey) Law 2019 (“SAFL”) contains a cross-reference to Article 28 that would restrict its use to asset-freeze designations made by the UK or EU that had also been mandated by the United Nations (“UN”). Any other designations made by the UK or the EU, that were not required by the UN, would have to be provided for in the relevant sanctions Order by reference to Articles 3(1) and 3(4)(e). The Amendment would remove the inappropriate reference at Article 3(4)(c) to Article 28, and would also introduce Article 3(6), which sets out the purposes referred to in Article 3(4)(c). These changes would ensure that all those who are made subject to an asset-freeze by the EU or UK can be designated for the asset-freeze imposed by Part 3 of SAFL by reference to Article 3(4)(c), regardless of whether the UN does or does not require an asset-freeze.
RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS: There are no manpower or financial resource implications arising from the Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-
ACTION REQUIRED: The Greffier of the States is requested to arrange to lodge “au Greffe” the Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201- with a view to the Amendment being debated at the earliest possible date.
SIGNATURE: SENATOR IAN GORST			POSITION: MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL RELATIONS

DATE SIGNED			EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE DECISION

Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-

REPORT

Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Amendment) (Jersey) Law 201-

1. Background

1.1 The Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Jersey) Law 2019 (“SAFL”) was passed by the States Assembly on 6 December 2018. One of its key aims was to create one set of asset-freezing provisions in one law for all persons or entities designated for the purpose of an asset-freeze in Jersey.

1.2 Article 3 of SAFL enables the Minister for External Relations to make sanctions Orders implementing European Union (“EU”) or United Kingdom (“UK”) sanctions regulations, which can include provisions that make EU or UK asset-freeze designations effective immediately. However, Article 3(4)(c) contains a cross-reference to Article 28 that would restrict its use to asset-freeze designations made by the EU or UK that had also been mandated by the United Nations (“UN”). Any other designations made by the EU or UK, that were not required by the UN, would have to be provided for in the relevant sanctions Order by reference to Articles 3(1) and 3(4)(e).

1.3 It was intended (as part of the rationalisation of the sanctions system) that the ability to engage Part 3 (asset freezing) should be as simple as possible to ensure that it is most effective. In line with this, the original intention of Article 3(4)(c) was that it should also be utilised to provide for designations that were not required by the UN.

2. Legislative provisions

Articles (3)(4)(c) and 3(6)

2.1 The Amendment would remove the inappropriate reference at Article 3(4)(c) to Article 28, and would also introduce Article 3(6), which sets out the purposes referred to in Article 3(4)(c). These changes would ensure that all those who are made subject to an asset-freeze by the EU or UK can be designated for the asset-freeze imposed by Part 3 of SAFL by reference to Article 3(4)(c), regardless of whether the UN does or does not require an asset- freeze.

3. Human Rights

3.1 The draft Law has been reviewed by the Law Officers’ Department to ensure compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights and it was determined that due to the nature of the amendments made, the draft Law does not give rise to any additional human rights issues than exist under the Sanctions and Asset-Freezing (Jersey) Law 2019.

4. Coming into force

4.1 The Amendment will come into force on the day after its registration by the Royal Court.

5. Manpower and resource implications

5.1 There are no manpower or resource implications arising from the Regulations.