Sanctions against the ‘Belorus’ sanatorium

Question for written answer  E-000586/2021
to the Council
Rule 138
Bronis Ropė (Verts/ALE)

I was recently approached by representatives of the ‘Belorus’ sanatorium. This sanatorium is a legal entity registered and operating in the Republic of Lithuania, providing health care and treatment services. The sanatorium belongs to the Presidential Administration of Belarus. To my knowledge, neither this sanatorium nor the Presidential Administration of Belarus is included in Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 of 18 May 2006 concerning restrictive measures against President Lukashenko and certain officials of Belarus, but the sanatorium has been sanctioned in Lithuania. Viktar Uladzimiravich Sheyman, Head of the Presidential Administration of Belarus, is included in Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006, but he chairs that board because he is an appointed civil servant.

Could the Council please urgently explain:

• 1.Is Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 applicable to the sanatorium?
• 2.Given that the Commission’s guidelines for the implementation of the provisions of Council Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 of 7 December 2020 do not contain a rule stating that a listed civil servant appointed director of a public authority exercises control himself, have sanctions been applied in the case of the ‘Belorus’ sanatorium on the basis of an overly broad interpretation of the above-mentioned Council Regulation?
• 3.Does the Council know whether similar sanctions have been applied to the ‘Belorusija’ sanatorium operating in Jūrmala, Latvia? If not, why not?