Isabel dos Santos says she will appeal the sanctions and prove the lies of the Angolan Government

by time news

The British Government announced today that it⁢ has ⁢imposed sanctions against three kleptocrats, including the daughter of a former Angolan President, including an entry ban and an asset ‍freeze, as part of a campaign ⁢against corruption.

Isabel​ dos Santos⁣ responded ⁣through her press office, considering the decision “wrong and​ unjustified” and denied again that she had been allocated money from ⁤the ‍state oil company⁢ Sonangol or the telecommunications operator, Unitel.

“No court has found me guilty of corruption or bribery. We are facing another phase in Angola’s politically ⁣motivated ⁣campaign of persecution against me and my family,” he insisted, ​saying he intends to⁣ appeal to make the British decision.

“I hope that the United Kingdom will give me the opportunity to present my evidence and prove these lies that have been ‍made against me by the Angolan regime”, he emphasized in a statement that Lusa had access to.

In addition to Isabel dos Santos, as of today, partner and friend Paula Oliveira and former Sonangol finance director Sarju Raikundalia are ⁢also⁣ the target of sanctions.

“Isabel dos⁤ Santos, daughter‍ of⁤ the former President of Angola, systematically abused her position in state-owned companies to embezzle ​at least ‌350 million pounds sterling. [420 milhões de euros]depriving Angola of resources and funding for much-needed development”, says the British Government, reminding‍ them ⁣that the businesswoman has been the target of‌ a red notice from Interpol since November 2022 and, ⁢last‍ month , she lost a case ‌in⁣ the Court of Appeal regarding ‍the freezing of ⁣assets around the world.

Her associates ‌helped Isabel‌ dos Santos “to divert the wealth of Angola to ​her own benefit”, he says.

Two other​ kleptocrats are covered by the sanctions, the Ukrainian Dmitry⁣ Firtash‌ and the Latvian politician Aivars Lembergs.

This is a radical‍ change in how the Government is “using its sanctions ⁣powers to create a more hostile environment for the United Kingdom for agents of corruption to ​operate”, the government says, stressing⁤ that ” the fight against corruption and the financing⁣ of illegal crime ‍is essential to. protect ‍the British public from organized ​crime.”

The sanctions complement the work being done ‍by the International Anti-Corruption Coordination Center (IACCC), an international multi-agency law enforcement ‌unit that ‌provides support in⁢ investigations into‌ corruption ⁢and misappropriation of country’s assets.

“The IACCC is currently providing assistance to ⁣investigations ​in 42 countries. In Angola alone, the IACCC has provided support‌ in identifying and freezing hundreds of millions‍ of pounds in the proceeds of crime”, the​ document says.

The IACCC has already‌ helped identify ‌£1.45 billion in ​hidden assets (€1.74 billion), of which £631 million (€757 million) has been frozen by court orders, and has enabled 49 ⁣people to be arrested or polluting agents.

What are the⁤ implications of⁤ Isabel dos Santos’ ⁢sanctions for Angola’s⁢ political landscape?

Time.news Interview: Unpacking Sanctions Against Isabel dos Santos

Editor: Welcome to Time.news. ⁣Today we ⁤are discussing a significant ⁣development regarding⁣ international sanctions. The British Government has imposed sanctions against three individuals, including Isabel ‌dos​ Santos, ‌the daughter of a former Angolan president, amid long-standing allegations of ⁢corruption. Joining‌ me is Dr. Maria Silva, an expert in international law and governance. Thank you for being here, Dr.⁤ Silva.

Dr. Silva: Thank you for having me. It’s an important‌ topic, and I’m glad ⁣to discuss it.

Editor: Let’s dive in. The British Government⁤ has stated that dos Santos​ embezzled at least £350 million ​from Angola’s state-owned companies. What does ‍this mean ⁤for the UK’s stance on global corruption?

Dr. Silva: This move ​by‍ the UK is quite significant. It reflects a ‌broader commitment to combat corruption and hold individuals accountable regardless of their ⁢status. By targeting high-profile figures like‍ dos Santos, the ⁤UK aims to deter kleptocracy and emphasize the importance of ethical governance.

Editor: Isabel dos Santos has described the sanctions as “wrong and unjustified,” claiming there hasn’t been a court ruling against her. How often do we see individuals countering sanctions with claims of political persecution?

Dr. Silva: Quite frequently, especially‍ in cases involving political figures or their families. ​Sanctions often provoke claims of injustice, particularly in countries where the ‍judicial system is perceived as lacking independence. Dos Santos’s⁢ assertion highlights⁢ her belief that the allegations against her are driven more by political ‌motives than by evidence.

Editor: She mentioned the intention to​ appeal⁣ this decision. What process would she go through to​ challenge these⁣ sanctions in the UK?

Dr. Silva: Challenging sanctions can be⁤ complex.‍ Typically, she would need to provide compelling evidence ​to show‍ that the sanctions are based on erroneous​ information or misinterpretations of her actions. This might involve​ legal proceedings where she can present ‌her defense, possibly including​ evidence of her financial dealings and business practices.

Editor: The ⁢situation emphasizes ‌broader implications for governance in Angola and the impact on its development.‌ How do such sanctions affect the⁢ country’s ⁢socio-economic landscape?

Dr. Silva: Sanctions can compound existing problems. ​If‌ key figures are targeted, it may deter foreign⁣ investment, undermine economic stability, and hinder crucial development ​projects. However, if these ​sanctions lead to increased scrutiny ‌and accountability within the Angolan government, they could ultimately encourage better governance.

Editor: Do you‌ think international sanctions are effective‌ in⁣ curbing corruption​ in the‍ long‍ term?

Dr. Silva: They can be effective, but not ​always⁢ in the way one might hope. Sanctions may ⁤disrupt the financial operations of corrupt individuals and signal⁢ disapproval, but for real change to occur, domestic political reforms and transparency are​ essential. Sanctions can ⁤catalyze change, but they are often only part of a much ​larger solution.

Editor: Isabel dos ‍Santos is reportedly seeking the ​opportunity‍ to present her evidence to the UK government.⁣ What do‍ you think could come from that?

Dr. Silva: If ‌she successfully presents persuasive ⁣evidence that refutes the allegations against her, it could potentially lead to a reconsideration of the⁣ sanctions. However, it also ⁤raises⁣ questions about the quality of governance in Angola; if she can ⁤prove‍ her innocence, it‌ could indicate that the accusations stem from domestic political conflicts rather than actual corruption.

Editor: what should the international community take away from this situation?

Dr. Silva: Transparency ⁣and accountability must be at the forefront of governance. This situation serves as ​a reminder that allegations⁢ of corruption can be potent tools for political maneuvering. The international community should strive for a delicate balance by insisting ⁣on ethical​ standards while⁤ also being cautious of the political contexts within which these allegations arise.

Editor: Thank⁢ you, Dr. Silva, for your insights today. The⁤ dynamics of⁢ international sanctions and corruption are complex ⁣and ever-evolving. We appreciate your expertise on this pressing issue.

Dr. Silva: Thank you for⁣ having me. It’s a pleasure to discuss such an important topic.

You may also like

Leave a Comment