The United Nations Security Council maintains targeted sanctions through specialist committees and publishes a Consolidated List of designated individuals and entities. Together, these measures form a baseline layer of international restrictions that states transpose into domestic law and that many national lists (such as US, EU, UK, and Australian programmes) explicitly track or build upon.
The Consolidated List is not a separate policy programme of its own. It is the unified publication that aggregates persons and entities designated under one or more Security Council sanctions regimes, as recorded by the relevant sanctions committees[1]. Each line reflects a committee decision (or equivalent Council action) that a named party is subject to the measures described in the underlying resolutions. The list is updated as committees add, amend, or remove designations.
When the Security Council determines that there is a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, it may take action under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, including measures that do not involve the use of armed force[2]. Member states agree to accept and carry out the Council's decisions[3]. In practice, most targeted sanctions are administered through sanctions committees of the Council—expert bodies that monitor implementation, consider listing requests, grant exemptions where resolutions allow, and report to the Council[4].
Examples of long-running committee regimes that feed names into the consolidated dataset include:
Other geographic and thematic committees (for example on Somalia, Yemen, Haiti, or terrorist financing) also maintain segments of the overall sanctions architecture. Each regime has its own resolution text, listing criteria, and committee procedures.
While wording differs by resolution, Security Council sanctions against individuals and entities commonly include some combination of:
Additional prohibitions (for example on certain trade or services) may apply under specific programmes. The exact legal effect in any situation depends on the resolutions, domestic implementing legislation, and regulatory guidance in each jurisdiction.
Listing is normally driven by member states presenting proposals to the relevant committee, together with supporting information. Committees decide whether to approve a designation under their committee guidelines and the Council's resolutions. Some listings originate in Council decisions rather than committee votes, depending on the regime.
Delisting and review pathways are regime-specific. Across committees, the UN describes processes that allow listed persons and entities to petition for removal or to seek humanitarian exemptions through committee channels[4].
For committees other than the 1267/1989/2253 ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaida/Taliban regime, the Focal Point for delisting receives delisting requests and forwards them to the relevant committee for consideration, within procedures set by the Council[5].
For the ISIL (Da'esh) and Al-Qaida sanctions listing, the Security Council established an independent Office of the Ombudsperson to review delisting requests and report to the committee[6]. This mechanism is specific to that regime; other committees do not use the same Ombudsperson process.
UN designations are typically incorporated or replicated in major national sanctions programmes. For example, US, EU, UK, and Australian authorities generally treat UN-listed parties as sanctioned under their own frameworks, often with additional domestic designations layered on top. The direction of travel matters: UN Security Council listings flow into many domestic lists; the reverse is not true — a party sanctioned only under a national programme is not necessarily on the UN Consolidated List unless the Council or a committee has also designated them.
Compliance programmes therefore usually screen both the UN consolidated data and jurisdiction-specific lists to capture autonomous national measures and sectoral restrictions that the UN list does not reflect.
The Council sets the international obligation; each member state implements through its own laws, regulations, and supervisors. There is no single UN agency that freezes bank accounts worldwide or arrests individuals for sanctions breaches. Gaps in capacity, differing legal definitions of ownership and control, and varying administrative practice can produce uneven enforcement even though the Charter obligation is universal. Multilateral monitoring and reporting by committees and panels of experts aim to improve transparency and compliance, but day-to-day policing remains national.
The consolidated publication aggregates entries across all active committee regimes. Public reporting and committee materials often describe totals on the order of roughly nine hundred or more individuals and entities, depending on the date and how entries are counted; the number moves frequently as designations are added or removed. Where shown above, the live count reflects this site's current snapshot of consolidated-list entries across committees.
Sanctions Checklist lets you query multiple international and national lists in one workflow. First searches are free.
Search sanctions listsThis page is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Sanctions rules change frequently and vary by jurisdiction. Consult qualified counsel or your regulator for guidance on specific transactions, screening obligations, or listings.