Targeted sanctions have come to be viewed as an indispensable tool in the fight against terrorism. Since 1999, the UN Security Council has designated hundreds of individuals and entities, imposing assets freezes, travel bans and arms embargoes to hinder support for the Taliban, Al-Qaida and ISIL (Da’esh). However, as the number of designations has grown, a clear need has also emerged for a robust independent review procedure, so that those designated can seek removal of their name from the sanctions list.
Ten years ago, the Security Council created the Office of the Ombudsperson with that purpose in mind. Since then, individuals and entities designated on the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions List have had the opportunity to have their listing reviewed by an independent and impartial Ombudsperson who recommends either retention or delisting after consulting with all relevant parties, including with the petitioner.
This panel will discuss, inter alia, how the Security Council came to the unanimous decision to establish the Office of the Ombudsperson, the unique ‘jurisprudence’ that has emerged, and what this means for petitioners. The discussion will also provide context on the post of Ombudsperson, operating in the highly politicised environment of counter-terrorism policy-making.
Panellists
- Mr Daniel Kipfer Fasciati: Ombudsperson to the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee
- Judge Kimberly Prost: Judge at the International Criminal Court and former Ombudsperson
- Ms Aurélie Berthet, International Lawyer
- Dr Devika Hovell, Associate Professor in Public International Law, London School of Economics and Political Science
