THE MAGNITSKY ACT AND NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY: LEGAL ANALYSIS OF A HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO OF SANCTIONING A BRAZILIAN AUTHORITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63330/armv1n5-019Keywords:
Scenario, Sovereignty Protection, Magnitsky Act, International Sanctions, Brazilian Constitutional LawAbstract
The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, a U.S. foreign policy instrument, imposes financial sanctions and visa restrictions on foreign individuals for gross human rights violations or significant corruption. This article offers a rigorous, non-political legal analysis of a hypothetical scenario: a high-ranking Brazilian authority, like a Supreme Federal Court Justice, targeted by these extraterritorial sanctions. The study investigates the Act's foundations, its extraterritorial scope, and its intersection with universal jurisdiction. These are contrasted with core tenets of international law and Brazilian constitutional principles: national sovereignty, non-intervention, and peoples' self-determination, fundamental to Brazil's legal order and international relations. The paper then discusses unilateral coercive measures and Brazil's potential diplomatic and legal responses to safeguard its sovereignty and protect its citizens. Ultimately, this study aims to deepen the academic and professional debate on the complex interaction between domestic law, international sanctions, and the imperative preservation of the democratic rule of law.
References
AMORIM, Celso. Teerã, Ramalá e Doha: memórias da política externa ativa e altiva. São Paulo: Editora Companhia das Letras, 2015.
BODIN, Jean. Les six livres de la République. Paris: Du Puys, 1576.
BONAVIDES, Paulo. Curso de direito constitucional. 33. ed. São Paulo: Malheiros Editores, 2018.
BRASIL. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. Presidência da República, Casa Civil, Subchefia para Assuntos Jurídicos. Brasília, 5 out. 1988. Disponível em: <http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/ Constituicao/Constituicao.htm. Acesso em: 20 julho. 2008.
BROWN, Stephen F. The Magnitsky Act: a new paradigm for Human Rights sanctions. Human Rights Brief, v. 20, n. 2, p. 43-48, 2013.
BROWNLIE, Ian. Principles of Public International Law. 7. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
BULL, Hedley. The Anarchical Society: a study of order in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.
CANÇADO TRINDADE, Antônio Augusto. Tratado de Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos. Porto Alegre: Sergio Antonio Fabris Editor, 2003. v. 1.
CASSESE, Antonio. International Law. 2. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
CHOMSKY, Noam. Hegemony or Survival: America’s quest for global dominance. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2003.
DAMROSCH, Lori F. Universal Jurisdiction: historical antecedents and contemporary practice. In: VAGIAS, M.; TSAGOURIAS, N. (Orgs.). International Criminal Law: A Collection of Articles. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2010.
FREIRE, Paulo. Pedagogia da autonomia: saberes necessários à prática educativa. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 1996.
FRIEDMAN, George. The next decade: where the world's leading forecaster reveals where we're really going and why. New York: Doubleday, 2019.
GASPARINI, Diógenes. Direito Administrativo. 24. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva Educação, 2019.
GLOBAL COMMISSION ON GOVERNANCE. Our global neighbourhood. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
GREENWOOD, Christopher. The scope of extraterritorial jurisdiction. In: O’CONNELL, Mary Ellen. (Org.). The Law of International Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH. Annual report. Nova Iorque: Human Rights Watch, 2017.
HUFBAUER, Gary Clyde et al. Economic sanctions reconsidered. 3. ed. Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics, 2007.
JOHNSON, Robert. The new sanctions regime: Magnitsky and beyond. Journal of International Law, v. 45, n. 2, p. 65-80, 2019.
KEGLEY JR., Charles W.; WITTKOPF, Eugene R. World politics: trends and transformation. 10. ed. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth, 2006.
KELSEN, Hans. Teoria pura do direito. 6. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2000.
KISSINGER, Henry. Diplomacy. New York: Simon; Schuster, 1994.
MARTINS, Ana Luísa. A arte de contar histórias jurídicas: uma abordagem para a escrita cativante. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Jurídica Moderna, 2021.
MELLO, Celso D. de Albuquerque. Curso de Direito Internacional Público. 20. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Renovar, 2018. v. 1.
MENDES, Gilmar Ferreira; BRANCO, Paulo Gustavo Gonet. Curso de Direito Constitucional. 16. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva Educação, 2021.
MONTESQUIEU, Charles de Secondat. Do espírito das leis. Paris: Barillot & Fils, 1748.
MORGENTHAU, Hans J. Politics among nations: the struggle for power and peace. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. ONU. Carta das Nações Unidas. São Francisco, 1945. Disponível em: www.un.org. Acesso em: 30 jul. 2025.
REZEK, José Francisco. Direito Internacional Público: Curso Elementar. 18. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva Educação, 2019.
ROBERTS, Sarah. Targeted sanctions and due process in international law. Leiden Journal of International Law, v. 33, n. 1, p. 1-28, 2020.
SHAW, Malcolm N. International Law. 8. ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
SILVA, José Afonso da. Curso de Direito Constitucional Positivo. 43. ed. São Paulo: Malheiros Editores, 2020.
TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL. Global corruption barometer. Berlin: Transparency International, 2018.
TRUYOL Y SERRA, Antonio. Fundamentos de Derecho Internacional Público. 5. ed. Madrid: Tecnos, 1982.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. Global Magnitsky sanctions regulations, 31 C.F.R. Part 583. Washington, D.C.: OFAC, 2021.
UNITED NATIONS. United Nations convention against corruption. New York: United Nations, 2004. UNITED STATES CONGRESS. Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. Washington, D.C.: Public Law 114–328, Title XII, Subtitle F, 2016.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Viviane Cristina Martiniuk (Autor)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
