ZURICH (Reuters) – Switzerland has frozen Russian assets worth 5.8 billion Swiss francs ($6.36 billion), the government said on Tuesday, a big drop that could intensify international pressure on the neutral country to do more to sanction Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine.
The figure, which applies to assets frozen at the end of 2023, was down from the 7.5 billion francs in assets frozen at the end of 2022.
The main reason was a decrease in the market value of the shares and other financial assets which have been blocked, said the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), which oversees sanctions.
Still, the decline is likely to spark criticism from abroad that Switzerland is not doing enough to impose sanctions designed to punish Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine.
Although Switzerland has stepped up its efforts to crack down on companies and individuals using the country to dodge sanctions, other countries want Switzerland to do more.
The frozen cash is also only a fraction of the 150 billion francs in Russian assets that the Swiss Bankers Association in 2022 estimated was held by Swiss banks.
SECO also said the number of Russians whose funds are subject to being blocked in Switzerland now stands at 1,703 individuals, while the number of companies and organisations sanctioned is 421.
Switzerland has so far adopted all European sanctions measures aimed at preventing Russia from acquiring goods and technology for its army, but Bern has also forged its own path.
The Swiss lower house of parliament last week ruled out joining an international task force for enforcing economic sanctions against Russia which includes the United States, Australia, Canada, the European Commission, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Britain.
The government had recommended not joining the task force, arguing Switzerland already cooperated with the participating countries, and said staying out of it would benefit a peace summit on Ukraine, due to be held on June 15-16.
($1 = 0.9124 Swiss francs)
(Reporting by John Revill, editing by Dave Graham)
Comments