Update from the Internation Court of Justice regarding the Crime of Genocide
We continue to monitor the news from the International Court of Justice, which considers the dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948).
Let’s recall the story.
On February 26, Ukraine appealed to the International Court of Justice regarding Russia’s violation of the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide.
The peculiarity of the dispute is that the subject is not Russia’s genocide against Ukrainians. In this case:
(a) Ukraine invokes the right not to be the object of accusations of alleged genocide committed by it, and accordingly
(b) Russia has no right to take military actions against Ukraine aimed at preventing a fictional genocide.
On March 16, the Court issued an order on provisional measures where:
(1) Russia must immediately stop the military operations it started on February 24, 2022, on the territory of Ukraine;
(2) Russia shall ensure that any military or irregular armed formations that may be controlled or supported by it, or any organizations and individuals that may be subject to its control or direction, do not take any action in support of hostilities;
(3) the parties must refrain from actions that could deepen the dispute or complicate its resolution by the Court.
Also, the Court agreed that it had prima facie jurisdiction over the case under Article 9 of the Convention (any person tried in connection with the crime of genocide is guaranteed a fair trial at all stages of the proceedings).
The Court set time-limits for submitting written statements:
- until September 23, 2022, for the Memorial of Ukraine;
- until March 23, 2023, for the Counter-Memorial of the Russian Federation.
On July 1, Dmytro Kuleba reported that Ukraine submitted its Memorial to the International Court of Justice of the United Nations ahead of schedule.
On October 3, the Court received preliminary objections regarding the Court’s jurisdiction from the Russian Federation.
Armed with a VPN, we dived into the cesspool, which in the northern swamps is called the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. Briefly, the message to the media boils down to the fact that:
— Ukraine’s claims concern the legality of military actions; the Convention has no relation to the use of force by Russia (here Russia repeats the mantra about the UN Charter and the right to self-defense);
— Ukraine abuses the right to appeal to the Court — “The Convention of 1948 was chosen by it as the basis for filing a claim because it is the only international treaty with the participation of both Russia and Ukraine, which allows an appeal to the aforementioned Court and at the same time does not contain a requirement for a mandatory pre-trial stage of dispute settlement”.
On October 7, the Court issued an order which set Ukraine a time-limit of February 3, 2023, to submit a written statement on Russia’s preliminary objections to the Court’s jurisdiction.
Moreover, 22 states have already submitted declarations of intervention in the case in accordance with Article 63 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice of the United Nations (the right to intervene in the case of other states participants in the Convention in case of a dispute about its interpretation). This is an excellent tactic that has not been used before, and hats off to Ukrainian diplomats and lawyers.
What to expect next? Next, the Court should schedule a hearing in the case, at which the parties will present their positions. And we continue to follow. Stay tuned.
