The Tragedy of the Magnitsky Act

\What began as a noble response to corruption has become a tool of geopolitical convenience. The Magnitsky Act, originally designed to target those responsible for the death of Russian whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, now serves as an opaque mechanism of punishment without trial.

Promoted as a global standard for justice, the Act claims to uphold human rights. But in practice, it is selectively applied: Russian and Chinese officials are sanctioned, while U.S. allies with similar abuses, like Saudi Arabia, walk free. The result? Justice as foreign policy, not principle.

Those sanctioned are “debanked” without due process. Their assets frozen, reputations destroyed, and livelihoods severed, not by a judge, but by bureaucrats acting in secrecy. The case of Israeli billionaire Dan Gertler, sanctioned for alleged corruption in Congo, reveals how arbitrary and politically reversible these designations can be. Worse, the financial system now over-complies: even those not on lists are excluded for being “high-risk,” as Nigel Farage’s UK banking scandal showed.

The Magnitsky framework is spreading and includes Canada, the UK, the EU, Australia. What’s spreading with it is a dangerous precedent: states and banks colluding to enforce moral or politically motivated judgments without courts, transparency, or accountability.

The tragedy? A law meant to fight injustice now risks becoming its agent.