On June 19, the professional conference “Business vs. Sanctions,” organized by the popular legal publishing house “Yuridichna Praktika,” took place in Kyiv. The first session of the conference was devoted to key issues of Ukraine’s sanctions policy. The discussion focused on the need for legislative changes to improve the effectiveness of sanctions proceedings, as well as the idea of criminalizing sanctions as the final element of a comprehensive sanctions infrastructure.

One of the most incisive and highly anticipated presentations was a speech by Ilya Novikov, an attorney and partner at Barristers Law Firm, who offered a critical assessment of the procedure for adopting and applying sanctions in Ukraine. According to him, the current sanctions system exhibits numerous signs of chaos and, at times, legal nihilism. Mr. Novikov called this the “myth of a systematic sanctions policy,” which does not stand up to even basic scrutiny.

In his presentation, Ilya Novikov provided a detailed analysis of the case in which he represents former President Petro Poroshenko before the Supreme Court, highlighting the legal flaws that marred the sanctions imposition process. “This is the only case in which sanctions were imposed indefinitely, and with significant errors in personal data,” he emphasized.

The attorney drew attention to the speed with which the procedure was carried out—in less than eight hours—and to numerous procedural violations, including the absence of the original financial monitoring letter and the Ministry of Economy’s refusal to provide it even upon request by the Supreme Court. In addition, Mr. Novikov stressed that the Cabinet of Ministers made its decision “by voice vote” without having the complete set of documents before it.

He paid particular attention to the practice of publishing presidential decrees in print media, which was used to correct errors in a document that had already been signed. According to him, this manipulation made it possible to avoid a repeat vote by the National Security and Defense Council and the President’s signature, which contradicts the principles of transparency and legal certainty.

“This isn’t a system; these are artifacts. And if one of the biggest sanction cases looks like this, then the entire body of decisions deserves a critical reassessment,” stated Ilya Novikov. He also compared approaches to sanctions to the practices of absolute monarchy, specifically to the “letters signed by Cardinal Richelieu,” which allowed for arrests without trial.

In conclusion, Ilya Novikov called for reforming sanctions policy to restore its legal logic, proportionality, and soundness. “It is impossible to endlessly peddle the illusion that everything is done for the good of the state when there isn’t even basic adherence to procedures,” he concluded.