A/HRC/42/46 States have gradually been expanded.47 Amid reports that the sanctions have unintended effects, including boosting the domestic (indigenous) capabilities of Russian industries and the agricultural sector, 48 to the detriment of Europe, 49 there are regular indications that Russian workers experience the adverse effects of the sanctions in their daily lives, especially through price increases. 50 This being so, the Special Rapporteur has demonstrated in previous reports (A/HRC/36/44/Add.1, paras. 62–65, and A/HRC/39/54/Add.1, para. 29), on the basis of converging data provided by European Union think tanks and producer federations, as well as of Russian Federation official statistics, that the sanctions and retaliatory measures by the targeted country have resulted in both sides incurring losses in terms of gross national product. In the European Union in particular, agricultural producers have been the most adversely affected. 37. The Special Rapporteur has expressed concern in his recent reports to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/39/54, para. 42) and the General Assembly (A/73/175, para. 10) about the effects of the sanctions applied by the United States to the Russian aluminium company RUSAL, which have adversely affected its operations and the daily lives of tens of thousands of workers. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the lifting of these measures in January 2019. 51 He wishes to reiterate his appreciation to the authorities of the United States for having responded positively and lifted the sanctions. E. Qatar 38. The restrictive measures imposed by various Gulf countries on Qatar remain in force. The Special Rapporteur has received an invitation to visit Saudi Arabia, one of the Gulf countries applying such measures, and Qatar. The International Court of Justice may be expected to render, in the course of 2019, its judgment in the contentious proceedings initiated by Qatar claiming that the measures amount to violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. While the proceedings before the Court are pending, Qatar has also decided to make use of the procedure contemplated by article 11 of the Convention to challenge the restrictive measures adopted against it by some of its neighbouring States.52 It has been reported that early in May 2019 the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination held closeddoor hearings with one representative from each of the three States involved to discuss preliminary issues such as jurisdiction and the admissibility of the complaints brought by Qatar before the Committee. On 10 May 2019, the Committee decided to postpone its review of the case until its forthcoming session, to be held in August 2019. 47 48 49 50 51 52 Council Decision No. 2018/2078. Other targeted sanctions are being implemented by the European Union, in particular against various designated Russian officials in relation to an escalation in the Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov and violations of international law by the Russian Federation, which used military force with no justification. See, e.g., Henry Meyer, Laurence Arnold and Olga Tanas, “All about the US sanctions aimed at Putin’s Russia”, Washington Post, 8 April 2019. Judy Twigg, “Russia is winning the sanctions game”, The National Interest, 14 March 2019. See, e.g., Reuters, “German business group sees damage from Russia sanctions at around 100 bln euros”, 11 January 2019. “Russia suffering under new US sanctions”, Deutsche Welle, 10 April 2018. “US lifts sanctions on Deripaska-controlled companies”, Financial Times, 27 January 2019. Under article 11 of the Convention, a State party may file a communication to the Committee when it considers that another State party is not giving effect to the provisions of the Convention. On 8 March 2018, Qatar submitted two inter-State communications, one against Saudi Arabia and one against the United Arab Emirates. It is unclear whether the submission of an inter-State communication to the Committee is an obstacle to the exercise by the International Court of Justice of its jurisdiction over the claims made by Qatar based on the Convention. Article 22 of the Convention provides for referral to the Court only when the dispute is not settled by negotiation or by the procedures expressly provided for in the Convention. Interpretation of that provision in the case of Qatar involves complex issues of jurisdiction, parallel proceedings and lis pendens under international law. 11