Comments on: Damage Award Against Syria May Be Impeded By OFAC Sanctions

By: Ex-OFAC

Ex-OFAC — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:50:04 +0000

Clif — Whatever the outcome under international law, you are dead wrong on domestic law: “As readers of this blog will know, all Syrian assets in the United States are blocked.” The OFAC-administered sanctions on Syria do NOT/NOT include the blocking of the Syrian Government’s assets. Only a handful of Syrian governmental, security and military officials have been designated under Executive Orders 13338, 13399,and 13460. Check the OFAC website’s Syria brochure and the SDN List designations. So the notion that there is any potential applicability of TRIA here is mistaken. Please set the record straight.

By: Mike Deal

Mike Deal — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:39:29 +0000

The Dames & Moore case (arising out of the sanctions imposed on Iran during the hostage crisis and the Algiers Accord which brought it to an end) suggests the possibility that a claimant might (emphasis on might) have a 5th Amendment takings claim against the USG, which would have to be brought in the Court of Claims rather than a US District court if its over the jurisdictional amount.

By: Clif Burns

Clif Burns — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 04:36:04 +0000

If anyone can figure out what on earth Albert Samtu is talking about in the first paragraph, let me know. As to the second, I suppose that a U.S. citizen whose assets are blocked might have some due process arguments, but those arguments aren’t really available to the government of Syria when its assets are blocked.

By: Albert Samtu

Albert Samtu — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 02:31:21 +0000

Clif Burns should know that no U.S. Law can supersede International Law. His whole argument, is for naught. So, not only the damage award is impeded, the compensatory one is as well.

The whole action of blocking foreign assets is illegal and amounts to theft of an individuals’ money, an act which runs contrary to the Constitution of the United States.