Sanctions expansion lacks detailed evidence

The European Council added 826 entities and 743 individuals to sanctions lists on October 12, 2026, under the Ukrainian regime. These additions were based on two lengthy documents—Decision (PESC) 2026/2279 and Regulation (EU) 2026/2281—each with 948 pages. The justification for each entry relied on a single template, stating the entities or individuals "provide material support to the Russian military and industrial complex." This justification was drawn from a Russian government register of entities eligible for housing subsidies, with no additional evidence or specifics provided.

Legal basis for sanctions is unclear

The Council's sanctions are grounded in Regulation (EU) 2025/390, which targets entities or individuals linked to the Russian military and industrial complex or those providing them support. However, the Council's documents did not explicitly cite this criterion. Instead, they relied on the repeated use of the phrase "provides material support to the Russian military and industrial complex." Legal experts have criticized this approach for lacking individualized evidence and for relying on a single, unverified factual element from the Russian register.

Lack of direct evidence raises concerns

Legal experts argue that the Council's reliance on the Russian register is insufficient. The documents do not provide specific information about the nature of the entities' activities, their production, or their clients. This contrasts with previous cases, such as the sanctions on MegaFon and Roman Abramovich, where the Council provided concrete evidence linking the entities to the Russian military-industrial complex. The absence of such details has raised questions about the legal justification for the new sanctions.

Procedural issues in the sanctions process

The Council's documents do not mention informing the affected individuals or entities about the sanctions, nor do they provide a mechanism for them to challenge the measures. This omission has raised concerns about the procedural fairness of the process and the rights of defense for those included in the sanctions list. Legal experts emphasize that due process is a fundamental principle in international law and should be upheld in such cases.

Tight deadlines complicate challenges

The deadline for appealing the sanctions is December 23, 2026, as per the publication in the Official Journal. However, the Council has set a much shorter deadline for individuals to request a review of their inclusion—only 14 days from October 27, 2026. This tight timeline poses practical difficulties, especially for those whose assets are frozen and require prior authorization from national authorities to access.

Compliance obligations complicate legal challenges

Individuals included in the sanctions must declare their assets within six weeks of their inclusion, and failure to do so is considered an attempt to circumvent the sanctions. This creates a complex situation where individuals must comply with these obligations while challenging the legality of the sanctions. The added pressure of compliance could make it harder for individuals to seek legal redress.

French operators face criminal risks

French operators face additional risks under national law, as non-compliance with the sanctions could lead to criminal penalties under Article L542-2 of the Customs Code. A pending directive, Directive (EU) 2024/1226, aims to harmonize these laws but remains unimplemented. This uncertainty complicates the legal landscape for businesses and individuals operating in France.

Need for transparency and evidence-based sanctions

The recent expansion of sanctions has drawn legal scrutiny, highlighting the need for a more transparent and evidence-based approach to including entities and individuals on sanctions lists. The adequacy of the factual basis for these measures and the procedural fairness of the process remain central issues in the ongoing legal debate.