1. Which are the procedures for the incorporation of Security Council Resolutions imposing sanctions into the internal legal order of your State? Are they incorporated through legislation, regulations or in any other way? Has the implementation given rise to any constitutional or other legal problems at national level? Is there any relevant case-law?

UN sanctions are implemented collectively by EU Member States. The EU Council first adopts a CFSP Council Decision to give effect to the UN measures at EU level. If the sanctions involve measures that fall under EU competence — such as asset freezes, trade restrictions, or financial measures — they must then be implemented through an EU Council Regulation, which becomes directly applicable in all EU Member States.

Some measures cannot be regulated through EU-regulations since they fall within the competence of the EU Member States. Examples of such measures are travel restrictions. So far, since Sweden became a member of the EU, there has been no need to enact new legislation covering such measures, due to the fact that the existing Swedish legislation on these areas already covers a situation where sanctions are imposed.

If a UN sanction would not be implemented by the EU Council, the Swedish Act on International Sanctions (2025:327) contains regulations for the implementation of international sanctions. According to this Act, the Government may decree that UN sanctions shall be implemented. The decree shall then be submitted to the Riksdag (Swedish parliament) for approval.

Since 1 January 2024, the Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (Finansinspektionen, FI) issues interim (temporary) decisions to freeze assets and economic resources. These decisions are made when the UN Security Council or one of its sanctions committees lists an individual or legal entity under a sanctions regime involving targeted financial sanctions. FI’s freezing decisions remain in force until the European Union implements the UN listing by amending an existing EU regulation on economic sanctions. All natural and legal persons in Sweden must comply with these decisions, including those not supervised by FI.

We have no knowledge of any case law of relevance to this question.

2. Does the choice depend on the content and the legal nature of the Security Council Resolution?

Yes, as explained above, some measures fall within the competence of the EU and some within the competence of its Member States. The procedure therefore depends on the specific measures taken.

3. When sanctions are imposed for a fixed period of time which is not renewed, are they tacitly repealed within your domestic legal order or is any normative action required?

For measures regulated through EU Regulations, no normative action is normally required when the fixed period expires. EU Regulations cease to apply automatically when their validity period ends or when they are repealed or amended by the EU. Since EU Regulations are directly applicable in all Member States, their expiration requires no additional domestic legal steps.

Regarding measures implemented under Swedish national legislation (such as travel restrictions, which fall within Member State competence), normative action is likewise normally not required. In such cases, the sanctions do not depend on special national legal acts; instead, their expiration simply means that Swedish authorities change the application of existing legislation, which already provides the legal basis for implementing such measures when they are in force.

4. When a Security Council Resolution imposing an export embargo provides for exceptions while not establishing a committee to authorise such exceptions, does the incorporating act appoint a national authority, which is competent to authorise export?

Yes, that is the standard procedure. Even in the instruments at the EU-level, authorities of the Member States are appointed as competent authorities. In Sweden the National Board of Trade and the Inspectorate of Strategic Products are normally appointed as the competent authorities to authorize exemptions from export embargoes.

5. Are Sanctions Committee decisions specifying Security Council sanctions or setting conditions for their activation incorporated into domestic law?

Yes, that is common practice regarding measures that are implemented through EU-regulations, where such regulations are drafted in accordance with the conditions in the specific sanctions regime. We have little experience of such conditions in the area of Member State-competence but they do exist, for example concerning travel restrictions, where Sanctions Committees have been entrusted to make decisions on certain exemptions. So far there has been no need to specify such procedures in domestic law, it could be applied anyway if need be.

6. Have there been cases where the act incorporating sanctions in the domestic legal order was challenged in court for being in violation of human rights? For example, have national courts assumed jurisdiction in cases where sanctions are challenged by individuals affected by sanctions: a. if implemented through EU regulations? b. if implemented directly at national level?

A number of EU-regulations on sanctions have been challenged in the Court of Justice of the European Union. For more information on these cases we refer to the court’s published case law.

We have no knowledge of any act on sanctions, either an EU-regulation or a national regulation, being challenged in a Swedish court for being in violation of human rights.

7. Are there decisions of national courts or state practice concerning the relationship between sanctions towards individuals and the human rights of these individuals?

No decisions in this regard have been taken by national courts.

Furthermore it is a well established position of the Swedish government that all sanctions regimes should include a clause that makes it possible to make exemptions from freezing measures to cover basic and extraordinary expenses. The EU has also taken steps to ensure this in most sanctions regimes.