Kyiv believes that Russia distorts the principle of “genocide”. The arguments of the parties are heard in The Hague
On March 7 and 8, the International Court of Justice in The Hague will hold hearings on Ukraine’s claim against Russia. Ukrainian authorities went to court on February 27, three days after the Russian invasion. Kyiv believes that Russia distorts the principle of “genocide” to justify aggression, and adds additional interim measures against Russia.
What does this mean? The BBC spoke to a fact-law expert who spoke out about anonymity.
What is this controversy
The International Court of Justice in The Hague considers any disputes between those of its states that recognize the jurisdiction of the court in international disputes, or disputes over contraction, or existing disputable parties. Russia only recognizes disputes over the agreement. Russia recognizes the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in The Hague over disputes over the application and interpretation of this applicability.
During the trial, Ukraine complains that this is fully justified by the genocide – as a basis for its actions in Ukraine. The expert says that one of these is quite likely – a very narrow and strict definition of genocide.
The question, in his opinion, raised about how reasonable the use of Russia is, is in line with the requirements. Ukraine’s complaint is due to the unusual, innovative and creative.
Ukraine complains that Russia appears to be using an unlikely rationale, and in fact is using the genocide convention as a pretext for a military operation. All the more undermining flexibility.
Russia believes that Ukraine’s goal is to ban the Russian-speaking population, which is not affected by anything. I am sure that all participants in the discussion about the events are taking place, this is beyond doubt, the expert continues. There are few court cases in Ukraine on this matter, but, for example, in Austria, which was part of a volunteer battalion during the hostilities.
But these are all incidents, not genocide, the fact-law expert is convinced. Genocide legally – an act with the intention of prohibition or conditions requiring propagation (causing health, spreading children from one group to other countries) is clearly expressed by the convention of harm caused by groups.
There is no national, religious, racial or ethnic group in the Donbass – “the people of Donbass” does not exist. There was no law of Ukraine in the relevant actions from the outside.
What temporary events are held
Together with unexpected events that have not yet begun, Ukraine promised to take temporary restrictive measures. Like Rule 39 of the ECHR Rules, they must be considered by disputes on the merits.
Ukraine asks the court to send an order to Russia on the following measures:
- Immediately slow down the military response, which, according to the frequency of observations in Russia, is carried out with “prevention and assessment of the alleged genocide in the Lugansk and Donetsk regions.”
- Ensure that action orientation is maintained by all formed warriors it directs or supports, and by all organizations and individuals under its control, on its behalf, or under its influence.
- Refrain from any actions and initiatives that may be complicated or interrupted by a dispute in the case of accepting the application.
- Submit a report to the court on the implementation of technical measures, which the court will indicate, one week after their adoption.
What are the consequences of a court decision?
Of course, this is a very important question. Such manipulation of genocide is offensive to the real victims of genocide, the expert says. It corrects the task of genocide, adopted in 1948 during the Nuremberg Tribunal. The court’s decision on interim measures becomes an authoritative legal discredit of all Russia’s arguments. The point was to litigate to capture the situation and facts to attract international trade.
International legal responsibility can be political (apologizing, restoring the situation to what it was) and material – now, for example, Uganda owes Congo court order money, and most likely free, sports expert. Sanctions are also an international form.
What are the chances for the execution of Russia’s decisions on the courts
Ukraine complains about the violation of the relative cessation of all forms of the racial convention in the territory of Crimea and the potential violation of the financing of terrorism in the territory of Donbass.
But these opportunities are not central to the confrontation between Russia and exports. And the international court in The Hague cannot consider the dispute over the annexation of Crimea; this requires arrest by the party.
Who Represents a Party in a UN Trial
There is a judge in the International Court of Justice in The Hague – Kirill Gevorgyan (husband of lawyers Marina Neelova), who until 2024 holds the post of vice-chairman of the court.
There is no permanent member of the court from Ukraine in the current litigation, in such cases the state party is the judge ad hoc (judge in the proceedings). In a dispute with Russia about the genocide of Ukrainian courts elected law of the President of the Hague Academy of International Relations, Honorary Professor of the Sorbonne Yves Daudet.
Russia is represented in this court not by the Prosecutor General’s Office, as in the ECHR, but by the Foreign Ministry.
As an expert on district law, who asked for anonymity, predicts, the Russian delegation will either not appear at the meeting and broadcast, or there will be a representative of Russia with propaganda statements.
The Russian delegation to the International Court of Justice, according to a BBC source, is already leaving foreign and Russian advisers.
A few days ago, the delegation left, writing an open letter, and French lawyer Alain Pellet, who until February 23 served as Russia’s representative at the International Court of Justice and other UN international tribunals. In particular, it covers the topic of accusations of Georgia of violating the international policy of sharply aggravating the situation with all forms of the racial problem. (The International Court of Justice did not become a case).
“Lawyers can make cases more or less suspicious.
The lawyer arrived, having arrived in Russia in previous disputes over Ukrainian complaints, as he was convinced that the vast majority of the Crimean population was in favor of reunification with Russia, and it did not matter to Ukraine about the racial conference in Crimea.
Now Pelle “sees no justification for the possibility of a war to impose a change of point of view in Kyiv or the territorial division of Ukraine – perhaps both.”
International law recognized the application of the law on the armed forces only in self-defense or on the basis of the content of the UN Security Council, he recalled.
In addition, a lawyer, that even if Ukraine violated the “Minsk agreements”, then “Russia has exhaustively fulfilled its obligations.” In any case, countermeasures against such organizations are not included in the obligations arising from the same rules, the lawyer believes.
Russia, according to the lawyer, tramples on international international law, including itself draws attention to an important role in the twentieth century.
Ukraine will be represented in the International Court of Justice by international lawyer Anton Korenevich, representative of President Volodymyr Zelensky in Crimea in exile.
Another trial and another investigation
The court in The Hague will examine current and past crimes in natural phenomena, emergencies against humanity and genocide. Actions from 2013 to the Russian annexation of Crimea will be considered.
Russia has signed the Geneva Convention, which, according to the existing truth, defines a military event. However, in 2016 the country withdrew from the electoral commission after the annexation of Crimea was recognized as an occupation.
So that you can receive the BBC – subscribe to our channels:
Download application: