(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (2) gives effect to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2014/145/CFSP.

(2)

On 24 February 2025, the Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2025/388 (3), which amends Decision 2014/145/CFSP.

(3)

Decision (CFSP) 2025/388 also introduces two further criteria for the listing of natural or legal persons, entities or bodies subject to the freezing of their funds and economic resources and to the prohibition on the making available to them of funds and economic resources. The first criterion applies to persons, entities or bodies owning, controlling, managing or operating vessels involved in certain activities or that otherwise provide material, technical or financial support to the operations of such vessels. The second criterion applies to persons, entities or bodies forming part of, supporting, materially or financially, or benefitting from Russia’s military and industrial complex. Decision (CFSP) 2025/388 also extends an existing divestment derogation to three additional listed individuals, includes a derogation for the supply of specific goods and services necessary for the Budapest metro system and extends the scope of two existing derogations regarding certain transfers of funds and payments.

(4)

Russian seaborne oil exports revenue accounts for a significant part of Russia’s budget and therefore fuels its illegal war of aggression against Ukraine. For the purposes of those oil exports, Russia is increasingly reliant on a fleet of vessels involved in substandard and high-risk shipping practices such as operating with inadequate or inexistent insurance (‘shadow fleet’). Those vessels pose significant maritime safety and environmental risks for the Union, its coastal Member States and third-country coastal states. Those risks have in particular been flagged by the International Maritime Organisation in its General Assembly resolution A.1192(33), adopted on 6 December 2023, which called on its Member States and other relevant stakeholders to develop capabilities and due diligence practices for the prevention, detection and reporting of the operation of shadow fleets and illegal activities facilitated by such vessels. Discouraging persons and entities from undertaking and facilitating high-risk shipping practices when transporting Russian-origin oil and disrupting shadow fleet operations therefore contribute to undermining revenue generation for the Russian war efforts while at the same time supporting international measures to preserve and improve the quality of the environment. Such efforts to address shadow fleet activities should be implemented in a targeted manner, taking into account the level of responsibility of the relevant operators in decision-making and operations. Furthermore, piloting services necessary for reasons of maritime safety should not be impeded.

(5)

Where necessary to combat the circumvention of the prohibitions set out in Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, the Commission should be able to exchange information concerning third-country trade, transactions and operators with the competent authorities of partner countries as referred to in Annex VIII to Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 (4) that apply similar restrictive measures.

(6)

Pursuant to Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5), certain types of entities, namely obliged entities as set out in Article 2(1) thereof, are required to report suspicious transactions to Member States’ Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs). Pursuant to Directive (EU) 2024/1226 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6) the violation of Union restrictive measures was added to the list of predicate offences set out in Article 2, point (1), of Directive (EU) 2018/1673 of the European Parliament and of the Council (7). As a result of that addition, and pursuant to Article 33 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 as of May 2025, obliged entities will be required to report to FIUs all suspicious transactions related to suspected criminal activity linked to the violation of Union restrictive measures. Furthermore, Article 8 of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 requires natural and legal persons, entities and bodies to supply any information which would facilitate the implementation of that Regulation to the competent authority of the Member State in which they are resident or located within two weeks of acquiring that information and to cooperate with that competent authority in any verification of such information. To avoid double reporting, Member States can decide that those persons, entities and bodies are not required to report the same information to competent authorities other than FIUs.

(7)

It is appropriate to increase cooperation between national competent authorities, including by reinforcing the role of FIUs in the exchange of information that is relevant for the purposes of the implementation and enforcement of the restrictive measures set out in Regulation (EU) No 269/2014.

(8)

Given that the compliance of Union operators is essential for the effectiveness of restrictive measures, the Commission should provide them with assistance to facilitate their compliance, especially where such compliance would require significant resources and where centralised support could improve efficiency. That is particularly so in relation to the due diligence required from Union operators in respect of potential business partners. The Commission should be able to process personal data necessary for that purpose.

(9)

In order to ensure the correct implementation of restrictive measures and the adequate protection of Union operators, it is appropriate that, pursuant to Article 11a of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, Union operators be entitled to seek, in judicial proceedings before the competent courts of a Member State, compensation in respect of certain direct or indirect damages incurred as a result of claims lodged by the entities or persons referred to in Article 11(1), point (a) or (b), of that Regulation, including damages incurred by legal persons, entities or bodies that those Union operators own or control, subject to national rules on the prohibition of double recovery. In addition, Union operators should be able to seek damages from persons, entities or bodies that own or control the entities or bodies referred to in Article 11(1), point (a) or (b), of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014. In situations where Russia or another third country takes measures to frustrate compliance with Regulation EU (No) 269/2014, Union operators can be regarded as being de facto deprived from having effective access to the remedies under those domestic jurisdictions.

(10)

In order to ensure the effective implementation of restrictive measures and to remedy possible situations of denial of justice, it is appropriate to provide for a forum necessitatis to allow a court of a Member State, on an exceptional basis, to rule on a claim for damages brought pursuant to Article 11a of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 where Union law or the law of a Member State does not establish the jurisdiction of a court of any Member State in particular. Jurisdiction based on forum necessitatis should, however, only be exercised where a case has a sufficient connection with the Member State of the court seised, for example where the claimant is domiciled in, or incorporated under, the law of that Member State.

(11)

Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 applies only within the jurisdictional limits defined in Article 17 thereof. At the same time, if Union operators are able to and effectively assert a decisive influence over the conduct of a legal person, entity or body established outside the Union, they may incur responsibility for actions of that legal person, entity or body that undermine the restrictive measures and should use their influence to prevent those actions from occurring.

(12)

Such influence can derive from ownership or control over the legal person, entity or body. Ownership means being in possession of 50 % or more of the proprietary rights of the legal person, entity or body, or having a majority interest therein. Elements that indicate control include: the right or the power to appoint or remove a majority of the members of the administrative, management or supervisory body; the right to use all or part of the assets of the legal person, entity or body; managing the business of the legal person, entity or body on a unified basis, while publishing consolidated accounts; or the right to exercise a dominant influence over the legal person, entity or body.

(13)

It is appropriate to require that Union operators undertake their best efforts to ensure that legal persons, entities and bodies established outside the Union that they own or control do not participate in activities that undermine the restrictive measures provided for in Regulation (EU) No 269/2014. Such activities are those resulting in an effect that those restrictive measures seek to prevent, for example, that funds or economic resources are made available to a person listed in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 269/2014.

(14)

Best efforts should be understood as comprising all actions that are suitable and necessary to achieve the result of preventing the undermining of the restrictive measures in Regulation (EU) No 269/2014. Those actions can include, for example, the implementation of appropriate policies, controls and procedures to mitigate and manage risk effectively, considering factors such as the third country of establishment, the business sector and the type of activity of the legal person, entity or body that is owned or controlled by the Union operator. At the same time, best efforts should be understood as comprising only actions that are feasible for the Union operator in view of its nature, its size and the relevant factual circumstances, in particular the degree of effective control over the legal person, entity or body established outside the Union. Such circumstances include the situation where the Union operator, due to reasons that it did not cause itself, such as the legislation of a third country, is not able to exercise control over a legal person, entity or body that it owns.

(15)

It is appropriate to make a number of technical amendments in order to ensure the clarity of certain provisions of Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, including those concerning documents held by the Union institutions and the processing of personal data.

(16)

These measures fall within the scope of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and therefore, in particular with a view to ensuring their uniform application in all Member States, regulatory action at the level of the Union is necessary.

(17)

Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 should therefore be amended accordingly,

(1)

in Article 3(1), the following points are added:

;

(2)

Article 6a is amended as follows:

(3)

Article 6b is amended as follows:

(4)

Article 8 is amended as follows:

(5)

the following article is inserted:

(6)

Article 11a is replaced by the following:

(7)

the following article is inserted:

(8)

in Article 12(1), the following point is added:

;

(9)

the following article is inserted:

(10)

in Article 16a, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: