The Global Magnitsky Act is a key international tool for combating corruption and human rights abuses worldwide. It allows governments to impose sanctions, such as asset freezes and visa bans, on individuals and entities responsible for serious violations.

The act originated in the United States in 2012 as a response to the death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian tax lawyer who exposed corruption involving Russian officials. He was arrested, tortured, and died in prison after uncovering a $230 million tax fraud scheme. The initial Magnitsky Act targeted Russian officials implicated in Magnitsky's death.

In 2016, the U.S. expanded the Magnitsky Act to a global scale, allowing sanctions on human rights abusers and corrupt officials worldwide. This Global Magnitsky Act authorizes the U.S. President to impose visa bans and targeted sanctions on individuals responsible for "extrajudicial killings, torture, or other gross violations of internationally recognized human rights" or for being government officials or senior associates of government officials "complicit in acts of significant corruption".

The Global Magnitsky Act functions through investigations, designations, and enforcement mechanisms. Evidence against potential targets is reviewed by agencies such as the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the State Department. Sanctions can be imposed based on documentation from human rights organizations, government intelligence, and media reports.

Once designated, individuals and entities face financial restrictions, including asset freezes and prohibitions on transactions with U.S. citizens and businesses. Sanctioned individuals may also be subject to visa bans, preventing them from entering the U.S.

The Global Magnitsky Act has several intended effects:

• Tangible consequences: Denying individuals entry into the U.S., seizing their property, and preventing transactions with banks and companies.
• Deterrent: Forcing foreign officials to consider repercussions from the U.S. government for unlawful violence or corruption.
• Incentives for foreign governments: Encouraging them to improve their own accountability mechanisms by cooperating with the U.S. on investigations.
• Public visibility: Bestowing public visibility upon marginalized victims of human rights abuses.

Studies suggest the act can have a wide variety of impacts, including increased media scrutiny, loss of political influence, and loss of employment. The impact of sanctions is enhanced when governments and the private sector work together to identify corporate networks and potential nominees associated with targeted individuals.

Inspired by the U.S. law, several countries and international bodies have adopted similar legislation:

• Canada: Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law)
• United Kingdom: Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations
• European Union: EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime
• Estonia: Law disallowing foreigners convicted of human rights abuses from entering Estonia
• Latvia: Law banning foreigners deemed guilty of human rights abuses from entering the country
• Lithuania: Magnitsky legislation passed unanimously by Parliament
• Kosovo: Magnitsky law passed in 2020
• Australia: Autonomous Sanctions Amendment (Magnitsky-style and Other Thematic Sanctions) Act 2021
• Czechia: Magnitsky legislation approved by Parliament
• Gibraltar & Jersey: Passed Magnitsky legislation

Despite its effectiveness, the Global Magnitsky Act faces several challenges and criticisms:

• Inconsistent enforcement: Some argue that sanctions are used selectively, prioritizing strategic interests over human rights concerns.
• Limited enforcement in certain jurisdictions: Authoritarian regimes may create financial systems that allow sanctioned individuals to continue operating.
• Limited long-term impact: Sanctions may cripple individuals financially but not always lead to systemic changes within repressive governments.
• Risk of being perceived as a geopolitical tool: Some worry the act could be seen as a "geopolitical revanche mechanism" directed mainly against specific countries.

The Global Magnitsky Act has been used in various cases across different regions:

• Myanmar: Sanctioning military leaders following their role in the Rohingya genocide.
• China: Sanctioning officials involved in human rights abuses in Xinjiang.
• Saudi Arabia: Sanctions imposed after the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
• The Gambia: Sanctioning former President Yahya Jammeh for abuses and corruption.
• Democratic Republic of Congo: Sanctioning Dan Gertler for corrupt mining and oil deals.
• Hungary: Sanctioning Antal Rogán, a senior government official, for corruption
• Bangladesh: Designating the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) for serious human rights abuse

• Executive Order 13818: Issued to implement and build upon the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. It blocks the property of persons involved in serious human rights abuse or corruption and is broader than the legislation in some respects.
• Executive Order 13848: Aims to prevent foreign interference in U.S. elections and provides for sanctions on those determined to have engaged in election interference.

• Permanent Reauthorization: The Global Magnitsky Act was permanently reauthorized by the U.S. Congress.
• Use of the Act in 2024: The U.S. issued an unprecedented number of financial sanctions and entity-based export controls, with Russia and China as primary targets.
• Sanctions on Hungarian Official Lifted: The U.S. lifted sanctions on Antal Rogán, a senior Hungarian government official, amid new talks. However, reports suggest some believe U.S. sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act against certain Bulgarian figures may soon be lifted as well.
• Calls to Reverse Designations: A group has called on the U.S. to reverse the designation of Haitian gangs as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs).
• Harvard Controversy: Harvard University faced criticism for providing training to officials from a sanctioned Chinese paramilitary group linked to Uyghur abuses.
• Potential Expansion: There are recommendations for expanding the legislation to codify broader language, increase resources, improve transparency, encourage multilateral collaboration, and advance justice.
• Coordination with Anti-Trafficking Authorities: The US should better coordinate its sanctions designations with its anti-trafficking authorities.