Sanctions are imposed on an individual in two stages - by Ministers first making regulations and secondly designating the individual, using a power in those regulations. Parliament has a role in the first stage, but not the second.
Dheemanth Vangimalla
Researcher, Hansard Society
Dheemanth joined the Hansard Society in July 2021 as a Researcher to contribute to the Review of Delegated Legislation. His role also involves supporting the day-to-day delivery of the Society’s legislative monitoring service, the Statutory Instrument Tracker®.
Dheemanth has a diverse professional background that includes experience in both the legal and non-legal sectors. He completed his MBBS degree at the University of East Anglia. He has since attained a Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) while working full-time as a junior doctor at an NHS hospital trust. He has previously conducted legal research with the hospital’s legal services department. As a research assistant, he has also contributed to a public international law project concerning citizenship and statelessness. Additionally, he has experience conducting scientific and laboratory-based research during his BMedSci degree in Molecular Therapeutics at Queen Mary University of London.
Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox
We will never share your data with any third-parties.
Share this and support our work
In the UK, the legislative framework for sanctioning an individual has two stages.
The first stage is the use of powers delegated to Ministers in Acts of Parliament, often powers in the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, to make regulations that specify the sanctions that can be imposed against individuals.
The role of Parliament depends on the purpose of the sanctions regulations.
If the regulations are made to comply with UN obligations then they are subject to the ‘made negative’ parliamentary scrutiny procedure – they don’t require active parliamentary approval to remain law but can be rejected by Parliament.
Ministers can also make regulations for what are called “discretionary purposes”. These are purposes listed in the Act such as furthering the prevention of terrorism or promoting the resolution of armed conflicts.
Generally, regulations made for discretionary purposes are subject to the ‘made affirmative’ procedure - they require retrospective parliamentary approval to remain law, usually within 28 days.
The second stage is the use of a designation power contained in the regulations to name and subject a person to sanction measures specified in the regulations, such as asset freezes or travel bans.
This is done on a separate administrative list. It does not involve Parliament.
The Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022 has amended the requirements in the 2018 Sanctions Act that a Minister must meet before exercising a designation power under sanctions regulations.
As a standard procedure, a Minister must have “reasonable grounds” to designate someone.
The 2022 Act also adds an urgent procedure, under which a Minister can designate a person before establishing “reasonable grounds”, provided that relevant sanctions apply to that person under the law of certain international organisations and countries, such as the United States and the EU. The Minister must also consider that the urgent designation is in the public interest.
An urgent designation is temporary. It ceases to have effect after 8 weeks, though this can be extended by the Minister once, for a further 8 weeks. Before the period of urgent designation ends, the Minister must certify that there are reasonable grounds for the designation to continue to have effect.
This work is supported by the Legal Education Foundation as part of the Hansard Society's Delegated Legislation Review.
In our latest ‘Whipping Yarn’, we talk with Simon Hart, former Conservative Chief Whip during Rishi Sunak’s Premiership. Hart opens up about his time in one of Westminster’s most demanding and discreet roles, chronicled in his new book, ‘Ungovernable: The Political Diaries of a Chief Whip’.
If a crisis or major national event occurs during a period when Parliament is adjourned, there are often demands from MPs, the media and the public for Parliament to be ‘recalled’. But the House of Commons Standing Orders stipulate that only Government Ministers - in reality, the Prime Minister - can ask the Speaker to recall the House. In recent years the House of Lords has generally been recalled at the same time as the House of Commons.
In response to the Modernisation Committee's call for views on 17 October 2024, we submitted evidence outlining key areas we believe the Committee should prioritise. Our submission recommended a focus on: strengthening legislative scrutiny, with particular emphasis on reforming the delegated legislation system; enhancing financial scrutiny, especially in relation to the Budget and the Estimates; addressing strategic gaps in parliamentary scrutiny; making more effective use of parliamentary time; and reviewing the Standing Orders, language and rituals of the House of Commons.
This briefing explains what to watch for during the Second Reading debate of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November. It outlines the procedural and legislative issues that will come into play: the role of the Chair in managing the debate and how procedures such as the 'closure' and 'reasoned amendments' work. It looks ahead to the Committee and Report stage procedures that will apply if the Bill progresses beyond Second Reading. It also examines the government's responsibilities, such as providing a money resolution for the Bill and preparing an Impact Assessment, while addressing broader concerns about the adequacy of Private Members’ Bill procedures for scrutinising controversial issues.
In this ninth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to explore the latest developments in the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, often referred to as the assisted dying bill. We are joined by Dr Marie Tidball MP to discuss the amendments she has secured for a Disability Advisory Board and an independent advocate for people with learning disabilities.
