EU's Top Court Dismisses Belaruskali, Its Director and Export Arm's Appeals Against Belarus Sanctions
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has dismissed three appeals against General Court judgments that had previously rejected annulment applications brought by state-owned potash producer Belaruskali AAT, its director-general Ivan Golovaty, and its exporting arm the Belarusian Potash Company (BPC) — joined cases C-816/24 P to C-818/24 P.
All three were listed in June 2022 under Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 for supporting the Lukashenko regime:
Belaruskali was designated as a state-owned enterprise that repressed Belarusian civil society by dismissing workers who protested against the regime, and for paying dividends to the Belarusian state
Ivan Golovaty was listed in his capacity as director-general and for his personal role in the dismissal of protesting workers
BPC was designated as Belaruskali's export arm, which received preferential treatment from the Belarusian state and generated substantial revenue for the regime
The appellants challenged both their 2022 listings and their 2023 relistings, arguing that the Belarusian government does not fall within the definition of the "Lukashenko regime" — and that paying money to the state therefore cannot constitute regime support — and that the General Court had incorrectly found that they benefited from or supported the regime.
The CJEU dismissed all three appeals, ruling that:
The Belarusian State falls squarely within the definition of the Lukashenko regime, as the individuals who make up the regime and those who run the state and government are effectively indistinguishable
Although the General Court had incorrectly characterised Belaruskali as Belarus's sole potash producer, its listing remained lawful due to the dividends it paid to the state and the significant revenues it generated in a sector under regime control
Mr Golovaty's listing was lawful given that President Lukashenko personally appointed him, instructed him to increase Belaruskali's support for the state, and that he held senior positions and benefited from his place within the regime
BPC's listing was lawful because its export activities and the preferential state treatment it received made it a direct source of revenue for the regime