Generally when you say these kinds of things, it's polite to not let your audience guess at what and who you mean. Could you please give us some links?
I'm smelling a troll here if you can't distinguish between a UN official acting in an official capacity being sanctioned, vs. private individuals who proselytize and engage in propaganda for a populist regime which, albeit unofficially, is "The Enemy" for the whole of Europe at the moment.
Also the decisions are not outside any legal process. To quote the agenda for the decision[1]:
> On 18 July 2025, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (‘the High Representative’) published a statement on behalf of the Union, in which she strongly condemned the persistent malicious activities posed by Russia, which form part of broader, coordinated and long-standing hybrid campaigns aimed at threatening and undermining the security, resilience and democratic foundations of the Union, its Member States and its partners. The High Representative stressed that Russia’s malicious activities had escalated further since the beginning of the war of aggression against Ukraine and were highly likely to persist in the foreseeable future.
Do you really in all honesty want to day that the accusations of some "High Representative" can replace the complete judicial process?
Zero process, zero proofs, just "allegations". Pretty low bar. Most undemocratic states would at least try some staged process. EU doesn't even try to fake it, at least in this case.
