ASK MAT- Is the enforcement of sanction breaches in Jersey the same as in the UK

ASK MAT- Is the enforcement of sanction breaches in Jersey the same as in the UK

MAT SAYS -  Short Answer – No

• While Jersey aligns closely with UK sanctions implementation (e.g., adopting UN/UK regimes via SAFL), its enforcement mechanisms treat penalties differently, creating a more prosecution-oriented system.
• The two regimes treat penalties very differently, and Jersey employs a split system based on the type of breach.
• Jersey relies on criminal routes for core SAFL breaches, with civil options limited to JFSC's regulatory powers.
• The UK emphasises flexible civil enforcement via OFSI.

Direct Comparison[1]

Jersey – What happens if you breach SAFL?

SAFL itself (Sanctions & Asset‑Freezing Law 2019)

• SAFL provides the legal framework for the implementation of UN and UK sanctions in Jersey, including asset freezes, reporting obligations, and licensing.
• The enforcement authority is the Minister for External Relations, not the JFSC.  

SAFL does not confer on the Minister the power to impose civil monetary penalties. Breaches of SAFL may lead to:

• Criminal offences (e.g., dealing with frozen assets, failing to report, breaching prohibitions).
• Proceedings before the Royal Court if prosecution is pursued.
• There is no civil fine scheme under SAFL equivalent to OFSI’s powers.

What about the JFSC?

• The Jersey Financial Services Commission can impose civil penalties — but only for breaches of regulatory/AML laws, NOT for SAFL sanctions breaches.
• JFSC’s civil penalty powers relate to:
• AML/CFT/CPF failures
• Breaches of the Financial Services Commission (Financial Penalties) Orders
• Regulatory misconduct (e.g., poor controls, failure to screen for sanctions, etc.)

Therefore:

• If a firm fails to maintain sanctions controls, JFSC may use civil penalties without an independent tribunal.
•  If a person breaches SAFL itself, the response is criminal enforcement, not a civil penalty by the Minister.

United Kingdom – OFSI under SAMLA

• The UK’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) has explicit statutory power to impose civil monetary penalties for breaches of financial sanctions without prosecution.
• OFSI’s powers include:
• Imposing civil penalties directly
• Applying penalty discounts up to 70% for cooperation
• Using settlement and early‑account schemes to avoid criminal proceedings
• Criminal prosecution remains available but is not the default, and most enforcement cases are resolved through administrative (civil) penalties.

Direct Comparison[2]

Key facts

Jersey

• SAFL breaches → prosecution route only (no ministerial civil penalties).
• Civil penalties exist only under JFSC’s separate regulatory powers, not the sanctions law itself.
• SAFL Itself (Sanctions & Asset-Freezing Law 2019)

• SAFL establishes the framework for implementing UN and UK sanctions in Jersey, covering asset freezes, reporting requirements, and licensing.
• The primary enforcement authority is the Minister for External Relations (assisted by the Financial Sanctions Implementation Unit), not the JFSC.
• SAFL does not grant the Minister authority to impose civil monetary penalties. Breaches are criminal offences (e.g., dealing with frozen assets, failing to report, or circumventing prohibitions), punishable by up to 7 years' imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine upon conviction in the Royal Court.
• There is no administrative civil fine mechanism equivalent to the UK's OFSI powers under SAFL. Investigations into potential breaches are led by the Economic Crime and Confiscation Unit, with prosecutions possible against businesses and individuals (e.g., for connivance or neglect).
• Role of the JFSC
• The JFSC can impose civil financial penalties.
• However, these are limited to breaches of regulatory and anti-money laundering/countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT/CPF) laws, not direct violations of SAFL.
• JFSC's powers apply under the Financial Services Commission (Jersey) Law 1998 and related orders, targeting:
• AML/CFT/CPF failures (e.g., under the Money Laundering (Jersey) Order 2008).
• Breaches of JFSC Codes of Practice.
• Regulatory misconduct, such as inadequate internal controls, failure to screen for sanctions, or poor compliance systems.
• Thus, if a firm neglects sanctions-related controls (a regulatory issue), the JFSC may levy civil penalties without tribunal involvement.
• However, a direct SAFL breach (e.g., knowingly making funds available to a designated person) triggers criminal enforcement, not a JFSC civil penalty

United Kingdom

• SAMLA gives OFSI the power to issue civil monetary penalties for sanctions breaches.
• Prosecution is supplementary, not the default.
• OFSI under SAMLA
• OFSI, part of HM Treasury, has explicit powers under SAMLA 2018 (amending the Policing and Crime Act 2017) to impose civil monetary penalties for financial sanctions breaches without prosecution.
• OFSI's toolkit includes:
• Direct imposition of civil penalties (up to £1 million or 50% of the breach value, whichever is greater; can be on a strict liability basis).
• Penalty reductions (up to 70% for cooperation or early settlement).
• Alternatives like warnings or settlements to resolve cases administratively.
• Criminal prosecution is available but not the default; most cases are handled via civil penalties.

Conclusion

• Jersey = prosecution for SAFL breaches. Penalties are in the gift of the courts!!!
• UK = OFSI civil penalties without prosecution. Civil penalties offer discounts up to 70%

SOURCES

• [jerseyfsc.org], https://www.jerseyfsc.org/industry/international-co-operation/sanctions/
• [comsuregroup.com] https://www.comsuregroup.com/news/not-included-in-jergov-consultation-jfsc-powers-to-impose-sanctions-without-the-involvement-of-an-independent-tribunal/