← Back to House of Commons Debates
Wagner Group: Sanctions Regime
25 January 2023
Lead MP
James Cartlidge
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
UkraineDefenceBenefits & WelfareLocal Government
Other Contributors: 26
At a Glance
James Cartlidge raised concerns about wagner group: sanctions regime in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
The war in Ukraine is a barbaric, illegal incursion into a sovereign nation by Russia. The UK has led the world's response to support Ukraine through military aid and stringent economic sanctions. Within the sanctions regime, individuals designated under sanctions can seek licences for legal fees if costs are reasonable; these decisions are generally made by Treasury officials without Ministerial involvement. The Government is considering whether this approach needs to change while adhering to the rule of law and supporting Ukraine's fight against Russian aggression.
David Lammy
Lab
Tottenham
Question
The whole House is shocked by the Minister's evasiveness in light of serious revelations about licences granted to Yevgeny Prigozhin. Labour calls for an independent investigation, urgent review of SLAPP laws, and restrictions on legal services to Russia.
Minister reply
I am not being evasive; decisions on legal fees under sanctions are generally made by senior civil servants, with no known case of a Minister making such decisions. The Government is committed to tackling SLAPPs through statutory definitions, early dismissal processes, and costs protection for victims. Ministerial oversight may be considered in future.
Alicia Kearns
Con
Rutland and Stamford
Question
Will the Government consider ministerial oversight of sanctions decisions, especially regarding Yevgeny Prigozhin's actions? Also, will there be consideration to proscribe the Wagner Group as a state terrorist organisation?
Minister reply
The Government will undertake an internal review on how such cases are considered in future. Ministerial oversight is under consideration for future processes.
Drew Hendry
SNP
Inverness N and Ross
Question
Despite the Minister’s gymnastics on this issue, it is clear that there are still serious and systemic links between the UK Government and Russian political elites. In 2021 the operations, tactics and human rights abuses of the Wagner Group were well known, and the EU and the UK imposed sanctions on Yevgeny Prigozhin, as the Wagner Group leader, for that reason. These revelations present a serious and immoral disregard for human rights obligations and due process at the heart of the Minister’s Government, and all this took place on the current Prime Minister’s watch, as he was Chancellor at the time.
Minister reply
I think that the hon. Gentleman submitted a similarly worded urgent question this morning, and obviously I respect that point, but there are no gymnastics here; I am merely setting out the position. The hon. Gentleman asked about legal advice and so on. Within the sanctions regime broadly, because we are a country with the rule of law and everyone has a right to legal representation, it is possible for frozen assets to be used to pay for that legal representation.
David Davis
Con
Goole and Pocklington
Question
I welcome the Minister’s assertion that there is to be a review of this approach, but I ask him to make it quick. Even the Treasury’s press release today indicates a level of misunderstanding on the part of the officials, claiming a fundamental or absolute right to legal representation.
Minister reply
As my right hon. Friend knows, I responded to his Backbench Business debate. He has been incredibly consistent in calling for actions on these points, and I respect that very much. However, I do think that the right to legal representation is a fundamental tenet of our democracy, which can mean—I am not commenting on the specific case—that individuals whom we find distasteful have a right to legal representation.
Margaret Hodge
Lab
Barking
Question
I have to say that I had never seen such a case of lack of professionalism, lack of integrity and lack of accountability as this one. It absolutely astounded me: I thought it was unbelievable. This issue of individual confidentiality does not play here. The Foreign Office publishes a list of the names of the individuals concerned. I therefore think that we have the right to know what went wrong in this particular case, and that the Minister should report to Parliament.
Minister reply
I have previously answered an urgent question, tabled by the right hon. Lady, on a matter relating to dividends in Russia, and—again—I respect her consistency in respect of a range of points that relate to this issue in one way or another. However, as she knows, I cannot go into the details of the specific case that she has mentioned. There are all kinds of reasons for that, and I think it important that we preserve it.
Bob Seely
Con
Isle of Wight
Question
I want to talk specifically about the SLAPPs primary legislation and where it will be. If it is to be in the Bill of Rights—as has now been indicated to me—rather than being a separate law, that may limit the scope of what we can do about SLAPPs. It may not cover all the stuff that is needed to cover the SLAPPs and the lawyers who engage in this practice.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend speaks with huge passion about these matters. Only yesterday, as he said, he presented a ten-minute rule Bill relating to this issue. He will appreciate that there are issues relating to parliamentary time, and that this is above my pay grade. I feel very strongly that we have done as much as we can on SLAPPs, but we want to go further, because we need legislation.
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda and Ogmore
Question
I am sorry, but this is so complacent, and the Government have been systematically complacent about the issue of sanctioning individuals for the last three years. The Foreign Office was not prepared: it did not have a proper sanctions regime in place.
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman is wrong to say that I am endorsing any particular action. I have made it very clear that I am not commenting on a specific case. What I have said relates to the general regime that pertains, and is without prejudice in respect of any specific case. The hon. Gentleman also said that we were not prepared.
Harriett Baldwin
Con
West Worcestershire
Question
Although we cannot discuss a specific case, “Wagner Group” is written on the Annunciator and I wanted to add a further question about the regime that we are operating within the Treasury. Will the Minister today, from the Dispatch Box, ask OFSI officials to have a red flag system whereby anything related to the Wagner Group is flagged up individually to the Minister responsible?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend speaks with the expertise of her position as Chair of the Treasury Committee, and I hear what she is saying. I have said that the internal review will take place. She is more than welcome to write to me in her capacity as Chair about that, and I will reply in due course.
Liam Byrne
Lab
Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North
Question
This is outrageous. The Minister has just confessed to the House that sanctions implementation is out of ministerial control, leading to a waiver for Prigozhin's lawyers to sue an English journalist in an English court.
Minister reply
The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that I did not confess that Ministers have no control over the sanctions regime; rather, senior civil servants under delegated frameworks make decisions on legal fees.
Maldon
Question
Does my hon. Friend agree that this is just the latest example of a dodgy Russian oligarch attempting to shut down legitimate journalism via SLAPPs and will he commit to publishing details on legislation against SLAPPs as soon as possible?
Minister reply
I hear what my right hon. Friend says about SLAPPs; we acted quickly when I was at the Ministry of Justice, but the parliamentary timetable is above my pay grade.
Layla Moran
Lib Dem
Oxford West and Abingdon
Question
The Wagner Group should be proscribed immediately. How will the Minister assure the House that a review of sanctions regime is thorough and timely?
Minister reply
We have sanctioned about 1,200 individuals and entities; more than £18 billion in Russian assets have been frozen; and there are various ways for Members to scrutinise the Government's actions.
Question
I am sure that all my constituents would regard the Wagner Group as an evil organisation. How many Russian individuals/entities have been sanctioned, what is the value of those sanctions, and what is the value of economic sanctions against Russia?
Minister reply
To date, we have sanctioned about 1,200 individuals and 120 entities; more than £18 billion in Russian assets have been frozen by our sanctions; three quarters of foreign companies reduced operations in Russia.
Question
Will the Minister confirm whether he is looking into other cases involving lawfare?
Minister reply
Although I cannot comment on individual cases, we will be bringing forward legislation on lawfare and ensuring it gets right.
Question
How many legal licences has the UK granted overall? How many have US/EU given? Was there any co-ordination input from our counterparts in the US?
Minister reply
I will look into exact figures and write to him. Decisions on legal fees under sanctions regimes are routinely taken by senior civil servants.
Question
When will the British Government not only introduce legislation on limited partnerships but bring about the review?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman talks about Londongrad; we are taking extensive measures on economic crime and standing up to Russia.
Question
Will the Minister bring together the two Departments, and look at proscribing the organisation and at the impact that will have on the efficiency of the sanctions regime?
Minister reply
I believe that the decision would be for the Foreign Office but we must work across Government. I will write to him on that point.
Chi Onwurah
Lab
Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West
Question
As well as the Wagner Group’s murderous activities in Ukraine, I am aware, as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Africa, of its activities across that continent. It has mercenaries in Mali, the Central African Republic, the Republic of Mozambique and Libya. It is targeting civilians, actively spreading disinformation and propping up autocratic regimes, all to defend Putin’s footprint and ambitions in the continent. Is the Minister saying that it is acceptable for someone to make money from those evil activities, be sanctioned and then get a licence from the British Government to evade those sanctions in order to defend themselves legally?
Minister reply
Of course we are not saying that. We are saying that, whether we like it or not, there is a principle under democracy and the rule of law of the right to a defence. Therefore, we have a system in place under the sanctions regime to consider applications for legal fees to be paid from frozen assets.
Anna McMorrin
Lab
Cardiff North
Question
We are continuing to sidestep sanctions. It is disgraceful that the Minister continues to defend that at the Dispatch Box. What message does it send to Ukraine and our allies that our own Treasury is helping one of Putin’s notorious warmongers evade sanctions? If he cannot tell us the number of exemptions and waivers that have been given to individuals, can he find out and commit to come to this House and publish those numbers?
Minister reply
The message to Ukraine is that this is a country that believes in the rule of law and democracy. That is why we support Ukraine.
Question
I do not know if the Minister has had the chance to read Oliver Bullough’s book “Butler to the World”. There is a copy in the Library if he has not. I recommend it to him because it lays clear Britain’s role in facilitating this kind of lawfare.
Minister reply
I repeat my earlier point about the actions we are taking on SLAPPs. We have already had the call for evidence and we will bring forward primary legislation.
Andrew Slaughter
Lab
Hammersmith and Chiswick
Question
Are the Government serious about tackling the use of SLAPPs? Threats of libel action by the Conservative party chairman over his tax affairs, use of the non-disclosure agreement by the Justice Secretary to silence journalists, and the Home Secretary’s attempt to stop the BBC reporting serious domestic violence by an agent of the security services when she was Attorney General, suggest that they prefer concealment over transparency.
Minister reply
Yes.
Clive Efford
Lab
Eltham and Chislehurst
Question
The approach the Government are taking, case by case they will not deal with specifics, is just an excuse not to answer questions on specific examples that we raise in this House. I know that the bar is very high, but there can be few of Putin’s allies more notorious than Yevgeny Prigozhin. How can the Minister come to the Dispatch Box and say that the decisions were made by a civil servant? When are you going to get on and do the job you were put there for?
Minister reply
The reason that we do not comment on individual cases is well-established. I expect that it would be exactly the same under any other Government.
Question
The Minister has been asked on a number of occasions how many exceptions and waivers there have been over the last two years. The House is united. This is not a party political issue. We just demand that he answer that question. If he cannot do it now, can he provide the House with details in writing?
Minister reply
I said to the former sanctions Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Rehman Chishti), that I would write to him. I will be happy to share that with other colleagues who have asked what information we are able to publish.
Dave Doogan
SNP
Angus and Perthshire Glens
Question
It is very difficult to believe that a regime exists now where civil servants can make this decision, especially in the case of Yevgeny Prigozhin. Anyone with a passing relationship with a newspaper would have realised that enabling that to happen would compromise their Ministers, yet they did not have such discussions. Can the Minister assure us that he will review that?
Minister reply
I have merely stated the fact, and it is the case, that these decisions are routinely taken by senior civil servants.
Question
I would be grateful if the Minister could outline to us what it is about billionaire Russians such as Yevgeny Prigozhin and others that make this Government feel that they need special licences so much that they are able to dodge sanctions.
Minister reply
To be clear, we do not make any of these decisions with prejudice to the legal case that the individual is pursuing. They have a right under our law to have legal representation.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
I recognise that the Minister has responded and tried to address the questions. We recognise that the Government have at least made some efforts to do so. But in this urgent question the House has identified an anomaly concerning the Wagner Group, which, as everyone has said, is responsible for some of the most brutal crimes across the middle east and Africa. The House wants urgency—that is what we are all asking for. Can the Minister indicate the timescale for that to happen? When will the Wagner Group find that the loophole that it has identified can be closed?
Minister reply
This is not a loophole in relation to the Wagner Group. We are clear on all the issues about the Wagner Group.
Shadow Comment
David Lammy
Shadow Comment
The Labour party has long called for action against kleptocrats using London as a laundromat. The Opposition supports sanctions against Putin, but recent revelations that the Treasury granted licences to Yevgeny Prigozhin to circumvent sanctions are shocking. This allows him to launch SLAPP suits to silence critics. Labour demands an independent investigation into this and changes to prevent such legal attacks on journalists and critics.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.