Mugabe ally loses EU sanctions compensation case

64      By their arguments, first, the applicants maintain, in essence, that the Council and the Commission categorised the first three of them and Breco International as ‘associated’ with the Zimbabwean Government without claiming or proving that they were involved in activities which seriously undermined democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe. Second, the applicants submit that, in any event, the grounds for the inclusion of the first three applicants and Breco International on the lists at issue are not substantiated by sufficient evidence.

65      The applicants’ argument that there is not sufficient information or evidence to warrant the claim that they were involved in activities that seriously undermined democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe is based on an incorrect legal premiss. Article 5(1) of Common Position 2004/161, as amended by Article 1(3) of Common Position 2008/632, provides as follows:

‘All funds and economic resources belonging to individual members of the Government of Zimbabwe or to any natural or legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them, or belonging to any other natural or legal persons whose activities seriously undermine democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe, shall be frozen. The persons and entities referred to in this paragraph are listed in the Annex.’

66      Accordingly, association with members of the Zimbabwean Government constitutes a ground for inclusion of the name of a person on the list referred to in Article 6(1) of Regulation No 314/2004, in accordance with the provisions of that article, without there being any need for it also to be shown that such a person directly engages in activities which seriously undermine democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe.

67      That conclusion is not called into question by the wording of recital 4 of the English version of Common Position 2009/68, relied on by the applicants, which states ‘moreover, certain persons and entities associated with the Government of Zimbabwe and whose activities seriously undermine democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe should be added to the list set out in the Annex to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP’.

68      Given that the applicants claim that the inclusion of the first three applicants and Breco International on the list of persons referred to in Article 6 of Regulation No 314/2004 is unlawful because they do not meet the requirements for inclusion laid down in that provision, the question whether the reasons given for the inclusion of the first applicant on that list are well founded must be determined by reference to that provision. Moreover, since, according to Article 301 EC, to which Article 60 EC refers, the adoption of a common position is a prerequisite for the adoption of a regulation such as Regulation No 314/2004, Article 6 of the latter must, in turn, comply with the provisions of Common Position 2004/161, which forms the basis of that regulation. That article refers to the members of the Zimbabwean Government and any person, entity or body associated with those members. The same description appears in Article 5(1) of Common Position 2004/161, as amended by Article 1(3) of Common Position 2008/632 (see paragraph 65 above), and in Article 5(1) of Decision 2011/101.

Continued next page

(3553 VIEWS)