We, the undersigned, urge the Council of the European Union to immediately delist Mr. Jacques Baud and other EU or Schengen-area citizens subjected to restrictive measures under the EU’s Russia-related sanctions regime.
These individuals have been sanctioned not for criminal acts, but for engaging in lawful activities — such as journalism, academic analysis, or political commentary — that are explicitly protected under European fundamental rights frameworks, including freedom of expression and freedom of thought.

Sanctions applied in this context:

• Lack judicial due process,
• Have a punitive effect despite being officially framed as foreign-policy measures,
• Lead to severe personal and economic hardship, tantamount to “civil death”,
• Are incompatible with the values and legal principles enshrined in EU Treaties, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the European Convention on Human Rights.

We call on the Council to:

1. Immediately delist Mr. Baud and similarly affected citizens;
2. Refrain from using foreign-policy sanctions to regulate lawful internal speech or dissent;
3. Review and reform the sanctions regime to restore its compliance with democratic and legal norms

The individuals concerned — including Mr. Jacques Baud — have been sanctioned exclusively for activities such as journalistic work, political commentary, academic and geopolitical analysis, or civil and political activism. All of these activities are lawful and explicitly protected within the European Union. They fall under fundamental rights, in particular:

• Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) — freedom of thought, conscience, and religion;
• Article 10 ECHR — freedom of expression, including the right to hold opinions and receive and impart information without interference by public authorities.

None of the sanctioned conduct constitutes a criminal offense under EU law or the law of any Member State. No judicial proceedings have been initiated, no convictions exist, and no violations of criminal or administrative law have been established.



The Council itself explicitly states that EU sanctions:

• are not punitive,
• are not judicial measures,
• are instruments of Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).

Because they are considered foreign-policy “measures,” they are not accompanied by the procedural guarantees normally required when coercive action is taken against individuals — such as due process, presumption of innocence, prior hearing, proportionality review, and determination by an independent court.

The Treaties on the Functioning of the European Union authorize the adoption of “measures”, not individual punitive sanctions. Yet the impact of these measures is punitive in nature. This raises serious issues with respect to:

• Article 6 ECHR — right to a fair and public hearing by an independent tribunal;
• Article 7 ECHR — no punishment without a prior law (“nulla pena sine lege” and “nullum crimen sine lege”);
• Article 13 ECHR — right to an effective remedy.

In effect, a legal vacuum is created in which individuals suffer severe restrictions on their civil, economic, and social lives without trial and without conviction.



CFSP sanctions are designed to regulate relations with external actors. Applying them to EU and Schengen-area citizens for their speech, publications, or political positions transforms a foreign-policy tool into a de facto internal disciplinary mechanism.

Because these measures are formally categorized as foreign-policy actions, they remain largely insulated from constitutional safeguards that normally protect citizens. This practice bypasses legal protections embedded in EU law and national constitutions and amounts to an extrajudicial form of internal repression.



In theory, sanctioned individuals may appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Union. In practice, however, review is largely limited to procedural issues. The Court generally does not examine:

• whether the sanctions are proportionate,
• whether they respect fundamental rights,
• whether the substantive allegations are justified.

Even where the Court annuls a listing, the Council can immediately relist the same person under slightly modified reasoning. Individuals are therefore forced into repeated litigation without final relief. This makes the right to judicial review illusory, contrary to the rule of law.



EU sanctions impose consequences that extend far beyond any reasonable policy objective, including: freezing of bank accounts, cancellation of credit cards, loss of access to basic services, exclusion from employment and contracts, social and economic isolation.

For EU and Schengen-area citizens, these effects amount to “civil death“, incompatible with the EU’s stated commitment to human dignity, fundamental rights, and democratic pluralism.



Sanctioning EU and Schengen-area citizens — without clear limits and for conduct that remains lawful — conflicts with the foundational values of the Union, including:

• Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) — respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and human rights;
• the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — especially legal certainty, proportionality, and effective judicial protection;
• the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocols, including:
  • Protocol No. 1, Article 1 — protection of property,
  • Protocol No. 4, Article 2 — freedom of movement,
  • Protocol No. 12, Article 1 — prohibition of discrimination, including discrimination based on political opinion.

Even where formally lawful, these practices are extralegal in substance because they circumvent the normative foundations of the European constitutional order.



We respectfully request the Council of the European Union to:

1. Immediately delist Mr. Jacques Baud and others sanctioned for lawful conduct;
2. Cease applying CFSP measures to citizens for protected speech;
3. Initiate reform of the sanctions framework to align with the rule of law and fundamental rights.

Sanctions without crime, trial, or remedy may be legal on paper, but they violate the principles of constitutional democracy. If unchecked, such practices set a dangerous precedent for all EU citizens.