Master's Thesis from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 1,0, University of Twente (School of Management and Governance), language: English, abstract: In the "e;War on Terrorism"e;, the United Nations (UN) have increasingly used the possibility to impose sanctions on individuals. Those sanctions find their legal basis in Article 41 of the UN Charter. In Resolution 1333, the Security Council (SC) requested to maintain an updated list, based on information provided by States and regional organizations, of the individuals and entities designated as being associated with Usama bin Laden, including those in the Al-Qaida organization for the purpose to freeze funds and other financial assets of those mentioned on the list. After the terror attacks of 11 September 2001, the range of anti-terrorist measures was extended in Resolution1373. In the European Union (EU), all UN Resolutions have been implemented through Common Positions in the area of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP, second pillar) and Regulations within the first pillar. [...]The consequences for individuals on the list are extremely serious: The effect[s] of a freezing order, if it is effectively implemented, are devastating for the target, as he or she cannot use any of his or her assets, or receive pay or even, legallyspeaking, social security. Against the background of those implications, it is important that human rights, especially due process (or procedural) rights, deriving from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) or the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), are respected and guaranteed for people that have been put on terrorist lists. These include the peaceful enjoyment of one s possessions (Article 17 UDHR and Article 1 ECHR Protocol 1), the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial Tribunal (Article 10 UDHR and Article 6.1 ECHR), and the right to have an effective remedy. (Article 8 UDHR and Article 13 ECHR). It is a question at issue, whether the listing mechanisms in the EU are in accordance with such rights. The control of assets held in bank accounts falls within the scope of the right to property, and an infringement of this right has to be based on a carefully conducted test of fair balance or necessity and proportionality. [...]While some more human rights may also be infringed, I will concentrate on the property right and, in detail, on due process rights. [...]To clarify these issues from a legal point of view, the paper focuses on the following research question: Which human rights problems arise from the setup of terrorist lists in the EU and how can they be solved?

Master's Thesis from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 1,0, University of Twente (School of Management and Governance), language: English, abstract: In the "e;War on Terrorism"e;, the United Nations (UN) have increasingly used the possibility to impose sanctions on individuals. Those sanctions find their legal basis in Article 41 of the UN Charter. In Resolution 1333, the Security Council (SC) requested to maintain an updated list, based on information provided by States and regional organizations, of the individuals and entities designated as being associated with Usama bin Laden, including those in the Al-Qaida organization for the purpose to freeze funds and other financial assets of those mentioned on the list. After the terror attacks of 11 September 2001, the range of anti-terrorist measures was extended in Resolution1373. In the European Union (EU), all UN Resolutions have been implemented through Common Positions in the area of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP, second pillar) and Regulations within the first pillar. [...]The consequences for individuals on the list are extremely serious: The effect[s] of a freezing order, if it is effectively implemented, are devastating for the target, as he or she cannot use any of his or her assets, or receive pay or even, legallyspeaking, social security. Against the background of those implications, it is important that human rights, especially due process (or procedural) rights, deriving from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) or the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), are respected and guaranteed for people that have been put on terrorist lists. These include the peaceful enjoyment of one s possessions (Article 17 UDHR and Article 1 ECHR Protocol 1), the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial Tribunal (Article 10 UDHR and Article 6.1 ECHR), and the right to have an effective remedy. (Article 8 UDHR and Article 13 ECHR). It is a question at issue, whether the listing mechanisms in the EU are in accordance with such rights. The control of assets held in bank accounts falls within the scope of the right to property, and an infringement of this right has to be based on a carefully conducted test of fair balance or necessity and proportionality. [...]While some more human rights may also be infringed, I will concentrate on the property right and, in detail, on due process rights. [...]To clarify these issues from a legal point of view, the paper focuses on the following research question: Which human rights problems arise from the setup of terrorist lists in the EU and how can they be solved?

Master's Thesis from the year 2007 in the subject Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 1,0, University of Twente (School of Management and Governance), language: English, abstract: In the "e;War on Terrorism"e;, the United Nations (UN) have increasingly used the possibility to impose sanctions on individuals. Those sanctions find their legal basis in Article 41 of the UN Charter. In Resolution 1333, the Security Council (SC) requested to maintain an updated list, based on information provided by States and regional organizations, of the individuals and entities designated as being associated with Usama bin Laden, including those in the Al-Qaida organization for the purpose to freeze funds and other financial assets of those mentioned on the list. After the terror attacks of 11 September 2001, the range of anti-terrorist measures was extended in Resolution1373. In the European Union (EU), all UN Resolutions have been implemented through Common Positions in the area of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP, second pillar) and Regulations within the first pillar. [...]The consequences for individuals on the list are extremely serious: The effect[s] of a freezing order, if it is effectively implemented, are devastating for the target, as he or she cannot use any of his or her assets, or receive pay or even, legallyspeaking, social security. Against the background of those implications, it is important that human rights, especially due process (or procedural) rights, deriving from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) or the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), are respected and guaranteed for people that have been put on terrorist lists. These include the peaceful enjoyment of one s possessions (Article 17 UDHR and Article 1 ECHR Protocol 1), the right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial Tribunal (Article 10 UDHR and Article 6.1 ECHR), and the right to have an effective remedy. (Article 8 UDHR and Article 13 ECHR). It is a question at issue, whether the listing mechanisms in the EU are in accordance with such rights. The control of assets held in bank accounts falls within the scope of the right to property, and an infringement of this right has to be based on a carefully conducted test of fair balance or necessity and proportionality. [...]While some more human rights may also be infringed, I will concentrate on the property right and, in detail, on due process rights. [...]To clarify these issues from a legal point of view, the paper focuses on the following research question: Which human rights problems arise from the setup of terrorist lists in the EU and how can they be solved?