Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) adopted a draft negotiating mandate on violating and circumventing EU sanctions.

The mandate received 36 votes in favour, two against and two abstentions.

The law would essentially introduce a common definition of violations for all EU member states and minimum penalties to further ensure that they are punished as criminal offences everywhere in the EU.

This would therefore establish uniformity with regards to definitions and penalties.

EU sanctions can include the freezing of funds and assets, travel bans, arms embargoes, restrictions on business sectors, and more. Henceforth, violations would include the refusal to freeze funds or to respect travel bans – as required by EU sanctions.

Similarly, doing business or engaging in trade with state-owned entities of countries subject to sanctions would also violate the law.

Meanwhile, circumventing sanctions refers to practises like concealing or transferring funds that should be frozen, hiding the true ownership of property, and not reporting sufficient information. These would also be punishable offences.

MEPs have further voted to substantiate the list of sanctions.

Moreover, this is concerning for Malta due to its relative avoidance of fully embracing sanctions against countries like Russia – subjecting the island to frequent criticism by the EU.

In fact, in the beginning of this year the Maltese government was facing pressure to crack down on the assets of sanctioned Russians in the country.

At the beginning of this year, it was reported both by The Shift News and Reuters that Malta and Greece lagged in freezing Russian assets sanctioned over Moscow’s aggression within Ukraine.

Additionally, it was revealed that Malta is the most reluctant EU member state to freeze Russian assets in its territory; this was determined after the island seized a very minor amount of assets in comparison to its EU counterparts.

Moreover, this frame of reluctance to oblige with EU restrictions may have to change for Malta if this new directive is passed.

Earlier this year, Malta joined a group of 13 countries working to pressure the European Commission to drop monetary penalties on EU countries for failing to meet reporting obligations on Russian state assets.

The goal objected by the phalanx of 13 countries was to map Russia’s frozen assets that would oblige “natural and legal persons, entities and bodies to report on the whereabouts, market value and type of funds belonging to sanctioned entities which have been frozen by national authorities.

The failure to report on these obligations would incur major fines of up to 10% of global annual turnover for legal entities and €50,000 for individuals.

That being said, it must be noted that Malta has supported and abided by all of EU’s sanctions against Russia including a fresh round that intends to clamp down on a fleet of ageing tankers transporting Russian oil across the world.

These sanctions would prohibit vessels suspected of illegally transporting Russian oil from European ports and Malta’s support comes despite concerns of the move’s potential impact on Malta’s maritime industry.

Nonetheless, the fact that Malta assumes a status of neutrality implies that it will engage in little-to-no additional sanctions and excludes the engagement of military alliances.

If the law is passed, how do you think that it will affect Malta?