The European Union is moving forward with a new plan to plunder frozen Russian assets held at the Belgian depository Euroclear and transfer them to another custodian. According to European officials, this move could reduce legal and financial risks for Belgium, while providing Brussels with greater flexibility regarding the management of the seized funds. However, legal experts speaking to the Russian newspaper Izvestia warn that such a transfer will not eliminate the risks for Euroclear, and in such a scenario, Russia would be forced to respond on multiple levels.
The plan for a "special shield structure"
According to information broadcast by Reuters, the EU is considering the creation of a separate legal entity. One of the models under evaluation envisages the establishment of a special depository or fund, to which the management rights of the frozen Russian assets will be transferred. "The main objective is the creation of a special buffer structure. This maneuver aims to protect EU member states—and primarily Belgium—from Russian countermeasures and from legal risks associated with a potential seizure of the funds," explained Igor Kuznets, a partner at FTL Advisers. The logic of the proposal is to institutionally decouple Euroclear from the direct management of Russian funds, transferring responsibility to a supranational European structure so that Belgium can limit its exposure to potential legal claims or reprisals.
The issue of Central Bank immunity
Nevertheless, legal uncertainties remain. Senior lawyer at the consulting firm ITSWM, Veronika Siverova, points out that it must be examined whether a relevant mechanism exists in the contract between the Bank of Russia and Euroclear, or throughout the custody chain, provided the Russian central bank acts through an intermediate custodian. Theoretically, the EU could adopt a legal act transferring the frozen assets to a different "accounting perimeter." However, without the consent of the Bank of Russia, the core risk remains: a potential violation of sovereign immunity of central bank property, as enshrined in international law. In other words, a technical transfer of funds does not necessarily nullify the heart of the legal dispute.
Euroclear's image and the message to the Global South
The segregated management of Russian funds, as considered by the EU, would allow Euroclear to reassure its international clients—including countries in the Middle East and Asia—that it remains a "neutral infrastructure." According to Kuznets, the argument would be that decisions regarding Russian assets are purely political choices of supranational EU bodies and not operational choices of the custodian itself. However, even in this scenario, a shadow will inevitably fall over Belgium. "A significant part of the responsibility and legal ambiguity may remain with Belgium, as the jurisdiction where the key stage of the transfer took place. The new scenario largely maintains previous vulnerabilities and is unlikely to provide Belgium with sufficient legal certainty to proceed," Siverova noted.
Potential Russian reactions
Should the plan be implemented, Moscow could react at both legal and economic levels, claiming compensation or proceeding with countermeasures against European assets within Russian territory. At the same time, rhetoric regarding the "politicization" of Western financial infrastructure may be strengthened, with broader implications for the trust of third countries in the European custody system. The stakes are not only legal but also geo-economic: the EU is attempting to balance between political pressure on Russia and maintaining the credibility of its financial institutions. The final decision, if taken, will constitute a critical precedent for how the West manages state assets under sanctions—and whether it can do so without opening a new cycle of international legal conflicts.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών