Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Trump Signs Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act Authorizing Sanctions Against “Foreign Persons” Engaging in Human Rights Abuses and Violations in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region

By Ali Burney, Wendy Wysong, Nicholas Turner, Brian Egan, Ed Krauland & Peter Jeydel on June 21, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On June 17, 2020, the President signed the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2020 (the “Act”). The stated purpose of the Act is to “direct United States resources” to address widely alleged human rights abuses and violations in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (“XUAR”) of the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”). The Act contains sanctions and reporting requirements targeting PRC government officials, and other individuals and companies, that the US government believes to be involved in the alleged human rights abuses and violations in XUAR.

Although the Act names two senior PRC officials, the current XUAR Party Secretary and the former XUAR Deputy Party Secretary, for crafting and implementing policies leading to human rights violations against Uyghurs and other minority groups in XUAR, the Act does not directly impose sanctions on those officials.

Sanctions Provisions

Section 6 of the Act requires the President to submit a report to Congress within 180 days of enactment, i.e., by December 14, 2020, and annually thereafter, identifying each “foreign person,” including any PRC official, that the President determines is “responsible” for any of the following sanctionable activities in XUAR:

·       Torture;

·       Cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment;

·       Prolonged detention without charges and trial;

·       Causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons; or

·       Other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, or the security of persons.

For each foreign person identified in the report, the Act states that the President “shall impose” either asset blocking sanctions and/or visa restrictions. However, unlike a number of recent congressional sanctions bills, including some targeting China, the Act does not require the President to impose sanctions against foreign financial institutions or others that knowingly engage in significant transactions with designated persons.

For the purposes of the Act, the term “foreign person” means a person that is not a United States person. The term “United States person” means: (a) a United States citizen or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States; or (b) an entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States, including a foreign branch of such an entity.

Waivers, Exemptions, and Termination

The President may waive the application of sanctions on any foreign persons identified in the report if the President determines and certifies to Congress that a waiver is in the “national interest of the United States.”

Section 6 exempts from sanctions: (i) intelligence activities of the United States; (ii) the entry of foreign persons into the United States necessary to comply with United Nations commitments or to carry out or assist law enforcement activity in the United States; and (iii) the importation of goods into the United States.

Section 6 also authorizes the President to terminate sanctions against any foreign person named in the report upon determining and reporting to Congress:

·       Information exists that the person did not engage in any sanctionable activity;

·       The person has been prosecuted appropriately for sanctionable activity;

·       The person has credibly demonstrated a significant change in behavior, has paid an appropriate consequence for the sanctionable activity, and has credibly committed to not engage in any sanctionable activity in the future; or

·       The termination of the sanctions is in the national security interests of the United States.

Lastly, Section 6 contains a sunset provision whereby sanctions imposed pursuant to the Act will terminate by June 17, 2025.

Non-Sanctions Provisions

The Act also contains provisions to identify companies with commercial links to PRC government activities in XUAR. These provisions appear to be intended to pressure companies by implying they may be targeted with sanctions in the future if they continue to engage in such activity or by drawing public scrutiny to such activity.

PRC Companies Providing Mass Surveillance Technology

Section 9 of the Act requires the Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Secretary of State, to submit a report to Congress on security and economic implications of repression in XUAR which should include: (i) a description of the acquisition or development of technology by the PRC government to facilitate internment and mass surveillance in XUAR, including technology related to predictive policing and large-scale data collection and analysis; and (ii) a list of PRC companies that are involved in constructing or operating the internment camps or providing or operating mass surveillance technology in XUAR.  These reports could potentially be used as the basis for future sanctions, whether under this Act, or under other US government legal authorities, such as the Commerce Department’s Entity List, which has been used already to target multiple Chinese technology companies for alleged involvement in such activity in XUAR.

US Companies Operating in XUAR

Section 4 of the Act states that it is the sense of Congress that US companies and individuals selling goods or services or otherwise operating in XUAR “should” take steps, including in any public or financial filings, to ensure that their commercial activities are not contributing to human rights violations in XUAR or elsewhere in the PRC and their supply chains are not compromised by forced labor.

Observations

The Act will result in the creation of the first US economic sanctions program in decades that specifically targets China. While the U.S. government already had the authority to impose sanctions for the reasons covered by the Act, under the Global Magnitsky Act, the enactment of the Act is nonetheless significant because it creates a mandatory procedure for the implementation of sanctions relating to XUAR, and because of the strong political signal it sends regarding the U.S. government’s position on issues in this region.

Although the Act mandates sanctions against foreign persons determined by the President to have contributed to human rights violations in XUAR, the President will have discretion in making the determinations required to implement these sanctions. In light of recent statements by Secretary of State Pompeo condemning China’s human rights abuses in XUAR, and the use of the U.S. export controls Entity List by the US Commerce Department against Chinese companies whose technologies are used in XUAR, the Trump administration may be inclined to expand its campaign against alleged human rights abuses in the region as called for in the Act. The Act may be followed by other congressional sanctions bills targeting China, such as the Hong Kong Autonomy Act, introduced in the Senate in May 2020.

Photo of Brian Egan Brian Egan

Brian Egan advises on a number of international legal issues that affect US and foreign clients, including economic sanctions, export controls, and anti-money laundering programs; national security trade and investment reviews; international arbitration and other cross-border disputes; international cybersecurity and data privacy; and…

Brian Egan advises on a number of international legal issues that affect US and foreign clients, including economic sanctions, export controls, and anti-money laundering programs; national security trade and investment reviews; international arbitration and other cross-border disputes; international cybersecurity and data privacy; and issues of public international law. He has worked in various senior legal positions for the US government, giving him keen insight into domestic and international legal matters that influence US government national security and foreign relations policies and programs. Before joining Steptoe, Brian served as the Legal Adviser to the US Department of State, the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council, Deputy White House Counsel, and Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement and Intelligence with the US Department of the Treasury. Brian has regularly appeared in public fora to speak on international legal issues, including testifying before Congress, public speaking engagements, and panel presentations.

Read Brian’s full bio.

Email
Show more Show less
Photo of Ed Krauland Ed Krauland

Edward J. Krauland focuses on export controls/economic sanctions. Ed’s extensive experience includes representing clients on matters involving US and multilateral economic sanctions, defense and nuclear export controls, dual-use export controls under the EAR, anti-boycott compliance, internal investigations and enforcement work, and review of…

Edward J. Krauland focuses on export controls/economic sanctions. Ed’s extensive experience includes representing clients on matters involving US and multilateral economic sanctions, defense and nuclear export controls, dual-use export controls under the EAR, anti-boycott compliance, internal investigations and enforcement work, and review of government procurement regulations in the cross-border context. His practice spans all aspects of these laws, including counseling, compliance work, transactional advice, licensing and opinion work, internal reviews, disclosures, and enforcement actions. He has served as co-chair of the International Trade Committee of the ABA Section of International Law and Practice. He is former Chairman of an ABA-wide Task Force on Gatekeeper Regulation (anti-money laundering compliance), and senior adviser to the ABA Section of International Law and Practice’s anti-money laundering committee.

Read Ed’s full bio.

Read more about Ed KraulandEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Peter Jeydel Peter Jeydel

Peter Jeydel‘s practice focuses on US export controls and economic sanctions, including the Commerce Department’s Export Administration Regulations (EAR), the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), and sanctions regulations administered by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)…

Peter Jeydel‘s practice focuses on US export controls and economic sanctions, including the Commerce Department’s Export Administration Regulations (EAR), the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), and sanctions regulations administered by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the State Department. His practice spans all aspects of these regimes, including counseling, compliance, transactional advice, licensing and opinions, disclosures, and enforcement actions. He has also represented companies and individuals seeking de-listing from OFAC’s sanctions list. In addition, Pete has assisted clients in anti-corruption matters, including under the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), and has experience handling reviews and investigations by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

Read Pete’s full bio.

Read more about Peter JeydelEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Government and Public Policy
  • Blog:
    International Compliance Blog
  • Organization:
    Steptoe LLP

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo