Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi
The world retains altering, and never at all times for the higher. We’ve witnessed the fast degradation of many supranational authorized constructions, which have fallen sufferer to their dependence on the desire, funding and values of the so-called collective West. That is true, as an illustration, for the Worldwide Felony Courtroom (the Hague Felony Courtroom). The nice intentions which guided those that established it twenty years in the past have evidently paved the street to hell. The additional, the extra so.
Deplorable as it could appear, it’s greater than pure. Suffice it to recollect the historical past of this authorized establishment, which has gone a brief method from alleged demand to full uselessness on the sting of absurdity, bias and cynicism. It is very important perceive what its present actions are conditioned by, the right way to react to them and what, ultimately, shall change this worldwide physique, which has compromised itself so shortly.
1.
It began ceremoniously, so to say. A longing for justice has at all times united tens of millions of individuals on Earth. Historical past holds examples of falling empires, whose rulers sooner or later went euphoric attributable to their very own lawlessness, solely to be swept away within the blink of an eye fixed by the favored wrath. But it’s normally tough to deliver the highly effective of this world to justice for crimes towards the general public good and humanity. That’s the reason supranational judicial authorities, not being topic to any nationwide authorities, are endowed with this activity.
Institution of worldwide legal tribunals after the Second World Battle was the primary try in historical past to claim the supremacy of regulation on a world scale, to attain justice and actual equality past state, financial and ideological borders. The Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals dedicated themselves to the duty which the courts of Germany, Japan and their former allies couldn’t have accepted the duty for.
When the work of the worldwide tribunals ended, authorized students from varied international locations proposed the institution of a everlasting worldwide judicial physique, which might deliver to justice these responsible for essentially the most violent crimes towards humanity. The lingering Chilly conflict impeded these plans. It was solely on the cusp of the Nineteen Nineties that the thought of a everlasting worldwide legal court docket was revived¹, and in 1998 in Rome the Statute of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom was signed as its constitution doc.
The ICC was established as an unbiased worldwide organisation. Its most important physique is the Meeting of States Events, which incorporates all member states (125 at current). The Meeting has a Bureau which shall help the Meeting within the discharge of its tasks (artwork. 112(3) of the Rome statute). The principle perform, i.e. bringing to justice those that dedicated the ‘most severe crimes of concern to the worldwide group as a complete’, is vested within the ICC. The Courtroom consists of 18 judges, elected by the Meeting, the workplace of the Prosecutor, elected by the identical physique, and the Secretariat. The judges perform as a part of the Pre-Trial Chamber, which initiates legal proceedings and points arrest warrants; the Judicial divisions, which think about the case on the deserves; the Appeals division, which evaluations claims in respect of acts and selections of the decrease divisions; and the Presidency, which inter alia is answerable for the ‘correct administration of the Courtroom, except the Workplace of the Prosecutor’ (artwork 38(3) of the Rome Statute). The pinnacle of it’s the President.
Below artwork.119 of the Statute, the Courtroom could, by itself movement, decide the admissibility of any case. Thus, the Courtroom is the one and supreme occasion in disputes it’s concerned in, i.e. it performs as a choose in its personal case (which, in actual fact, contradicts the nemo judex in propria causa² precept). All judges and different staff of the ICC have worldwide immunity and privileges on the territories of the member states, together with the Netherlands, the place it’s seated.
The ICC has jurisdiction over essentially the most severe crimes, particularly genocide, crimes towards humanity and conflict crimes. But its jurisdiction just isn’t common and covers solely crimes dedicated on the territory of its member states or by residents of its member states.³ Aside from the abovementioned controversial factors, the Courtroom’s Statute has contained different provisions from the very starting which in lots of instances might render unattainable the enforcement of its selections (and so they have, as we are going to see later).
In any case, in 2002 the ICC Statute was ratified by the required variety of member states and got here into pressure on July 1 of the identical yr. Again then, the scenario on the planet was completely totally different from what we are able to see now. It was clear that approval of the Rome Statute (like another worldwide treaty) required representatives of greater than 100 nations to hunt mutually acceptable wording, striving for enhancement of the cooperation on this sphere. Constantly advocating full compliance with the UN Constitution, the international locations assumed that any contradictions might be regularly eradicated with a give attention to the important thing rules of the worldwide regulation enshrined within the UN paperwork. Taking this into consideration, the Russian Ministry of Worldwide Affairs permitted the execution of the Rome Statute within the identify and on behalf of the Russian Federation in 2000.
But later the Hague Felony Courtroom displayed its political bias. The ICC itself com- mitted grave violations of the acknowledged rules of worldwide regulation. In opposition to this political and authorized background, in 2016 Russia determined to not be occasion to the Rome Statute⁴. The U.S. and a number of other different international locations acted in the identical method. Taking into account that China didn’t signal the Rome Statute, three out of 5 everlasting members of the UN Safety Council aren’t events to it.
2.
The worldwide group positioned severe hopes on the Hague Felony Courtroom at first. But on the very second of its institution it was fairly clear that the authorized construction itself regarded fairly unusual. Its constitution paperwork initially contained a complete row of inconsistencies, the primary of them being clear discrepancies with most essential relevant guidelines of worldwide regulation — primarily with its cornerstone, the UN Constitution, which accommodates the basics of the regulation and order within the post-war world. The UN Constitution is to be consulted when creating common treaties between states, in addition to quite a few regional and bilateral agreements.
Article 103 of the UN Constitution stipulates that its provisions shall prevail over provisions of another worldwide treaty. In keeping with article 38 of the Statute of the UN Worldwide Courtroom of Justice the primary supply of worldwide regulation are worldwide treaties (normal and particular), worldwide conventions, normal authorized rules.
But the Rome Statute supplied for its personal hierarchy of sources of worldwide regulation. In keeping with article 21 of the Rome Statute, the Hague Courtroom shall apply, within the first place, ‘this Statute, Parts of Crimes and its Guidelines of Process and Proof’; and solely within the second place (solely the place acceptable), ‘relevant treaties and the rules and guidelines of worldwide regulation, together with the established rules of the worldwide regulation of armed conflicts’.
Thus, the internationally established rules of worldwide regulation beneath the UN Constitution could also be utilized by the Hague Courtroom beneath the 1998 Rome Statute solely within the second place, after the Statute and the paperwork adopted by the Meeting and the Hague Courtroom itself. This fashion the established quasi-judicial mechanism was given a leeway within the type of the best to disregard the UN Constitution and the authorized norms enshrined in it. In reality, this distortion of the stability of the relevant worldwide regulation within the Rome Statute is inadmissible for any sovereign state, together with Russia as a everlasting member of the UN Safety Council.
In addition to, the notion of ‘normal rules of the legal regulation’ used within the Rome Statute is in its essence improper, because it doesn’t differentiate between the nationwide legal regulation (the US, for instance) and the worldwide regulation relevant to combating cross-border crime.
All this ‘salad bowl of rules’ was clearly not in compliance with the nationwide pursuits of the Russian Federation (or another sovereign state). Opposite to the identification generally utilized within the authorized science one ought to differentiate between the Rome Statute, the constitution doc of the ICC, and the treaties entered into by the us and its allies (different superpowers) throughout the Second World Battle, ranging from the Moscow declarations signed on 30 October 1943. Extra so {that a} reference to this Declaration of the 4 main states may be present in article 106 of the UN Constitution. The Settlement entered by and between the governments of the us, the USA, Nice Britain and France to strive the Nazi leaders and organisations accused of conflict crimes on the London Convention on 8 August 1945 is essentially totally different from the constitution of the Hague Felony Courtroom as effectively. When it comes to their worldwide authorized standing, by advantage of the UN Constitution, the abovementioned paperwork are above any doc handed by the Hague Felony Courtroom.
But those that influenced the event of the ICC weren’t the least involved. As an example, flouting of this elementary political and authorized distinction (amalgamation of the previous and the latter beneath the umbrella time period ‘worldwide legal justice’) characterised the pro-NATO prosecution of the Serbian leaders within the framework of the so-called Worldwide tribunal for prosecuting individuals answerable for severe violations of worldwide humanitarian regulation dedicated on the territory of the previous Yugoslavia after 1991. Russian research of worldwide regulation have by no means admitted this amalgamation⁵. Examples of such inconsistencies are quite a few.
3.
Because of this the ICC judicial follow raised authentic questions, not solely from authorized students. As time went on the ICC was more and more demonstrating its dependency on political and ideological elements which in actual fact shall be excluded from its follow. An apparent inclination was developed in the direction of condemning or pardoning solely within the pursuits of the so-called collective West on the premise of its a lot favoured double requirements. Curious as it could appear, this concerned currying favour with quite a lot of states (primarily the USA) which had been fairly dismissive in the direction of the ICC and its follow. It’s understand- ready, as within the West there’s a powerful hierarchy of relations which displayed itself just lately within the case of Benjamin Netanyahu, Yoav Gallant and others, when the European international locations being events to the ICC Statute at first voiced their intention to prosecute Israeli leaders however after a troublesome rebuke from Washington began speaking in regards to the ‘distinctive nature’ of the case and refused to prosecute the Israeli officers. Strictly talking, after that the ICC ought to have chosen to dissolve itself, as it’s unattainable to think about a better contempt.
Typically, in accordance with the ICC web site, it has thought-about 33 instances in additional than 20 years; some instances are into account, together with these in respect of a number of political and navy leaders from Africa (the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Sudan, Rwanda, Kenya, Libya, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, the Central African Re- public). They’re accused of tortures, rape, robberies, bloodbath, kidnapping, destruction of peaceable settlements, abuse of prisoners of conflict and civilians, together with ladies and youngsters.
A number of individuals concerned within the trials had been in actual fact condemned and imprisoned, primarily quick perpetrators in a restricted variety of international locations, officers who had been testified towards. Nonetheless, quite a lot of high-ranking conflict criminals went unpunished. The Hague Felony Courtroom demonstrated discriminatory blindness and listening to loss of their respect.
It is usually evident that for a few years the ICC has totally thought-about the instances of indisputably violent but fairly odd leaders of ethnic gangs, serial killers and rapists. As much as their elbows in blood of their compatriots, they nonetheless weren’t highly effective political figures posing hazard to the complete humankind. A query arises: are these ‘warlords’, leaders of conflicting African tribes and different criminals actual ‘worldwide criminals’ the nationwide justice can not deal with?⁶ Was it actually mandatory to ascertain such high-priced behemoth because the ICC to restrain and produce them to legal responsibility?
It’s no coincidence that former Chair of the African Union Fee Jean Ping informed journalists that the Courtroom is a toy of declining imperial powers⁷. Opinions unfold that apparently the ICC was solely considering prosecuting Africans who confronted the Western affect, and used Africa as a laboratory for testing worldwide legal jus- tice⁸. It shouldn’t go unnoticed that again in 2017 the African Union handed a decision calling on all African international locations to stop cooperation with the ICC when it comes to imposing
arrest warrants for African suspects and to collectively withdraw from the ICC⁹. The truth that the ICC is biased and acts within the pursuits of quite a lot of Western international locations refusing to prosecute individuals from the NATO international locations was recognised by representa- tives of varied continents. Because of this particularly Burundi and the Philippines declared their withdrawal from the Statute¹⁰.
One other factor has attracted consideration as effectively. For an ‘unknown’ cause the ICC failed to think about occasions within the international locations the place justice, peace and humanism had been nothing in need of a daydream but the place the US and their NATO allies had been advancing their pursuits. Thus, for nearly twenty years (from 2001 to 2021) the NATO forces had been engaged in lively navy operations on the territory of Afghanistan, the state which joined the ICC in 2003. In keeping with media stories throughout all this era they dedicated actions which might be considered crimes of war¹¹. But the ICC by no means did that.
One other instance: in November 2017 the then-Prosecutor of the ICC, Fatou Bensouda, utilized to the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber for a permission to provoke investigation of crimes towards humanity and conflict crimes dedicated by the Afghan opposition group ‘Taliban’*, conflict crimes dedicated by the Afghan authorities safety forces, and conflict crimes dedicated on the territory of Afghanistan beginning on 1 Might 2003 by US navy personnel and CIA officers. After eighteen months of consideration in April 2019 the Pre-Trial Chamber rejected the request, stating that ‘an investigation into the scenario in Afghanistan at this stage wouldn’t serve the pursuits of justice’¹². The Prosecutor appealed to the Appeals Chamber, which in March 2020 reversed the decision¹³, thus enabling the Prosecutor to provoke preliminary investigation, inter alia in respect of conflict crimes dedicated in Afghanistan by US navy personnel and residents.
This was adopted by a harsh response of the US, which isn’t a member of the ICC, to the very thought of bringing their navy personnel and residents to legal responsibility in a global tribunal. In June 2020 US President Donald Trump declared that the ICC’s assertion of jurisdiction over U.S. navy, intelligence, and different personnel in the midst of investigating actions allegedly dedicated by these personnel in or referring to Afghanistan ‘constitutes an uncommon and extraordinary menace to the nationwide safety and overseas coverage of america’¹⁴. Invoking authorities supplied in US regulation the President signed Govt Order 13928, beneath which the Secretary of State, in session with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Lawyer Normal, is tasked with figuring out any ‘overseas particular person’ that, particularly, has straight engaged within the ICC’s efforts to research, arrest, detain, or prosecute any United States personnel with out the consent of america, or has materially assisted, sponsored, or supplied monetary, materials, or technological help for, or items or companies to or in help of, any ICC efforts described above. Such individuals may be topic to having property blocked if that property is beneath U.S. jurisdiction; as well as, they are often denied entry into the US¹⁵. On 2 September 2020 the US imposed private sanctions¹⁶ on the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC, Fatou Bensouda, and Phakiso Mochochoko, the ICC’s Director of jurisdiction, complementary and cooperation division¹⁷.
Ultimately, regardless of the newly obtained proper to provoke investigation of conflict crimes and crimes towards humanity dedicated in Afghanistan the brand new ICC Prosecutor has not but charged any US navy personnel who participated within the hostilities in Afghanistan.
5 years later, having returned to workplace Donald Trump was fast to reiterate his place in the direction of the ICC. And he didn’t restrict himself to condemnation. On 6 February 2025 the US President signed an Govt Order which imposed sanctions towards the Worldwide Felony Courtroom in response to ‘illegitimate and baseless actions focusing on America and our shut ally Israel’¹⁸. The US President said that the conduct of the Courtroom ‘threatens to infringe upon the sovereignty of america’¹⁹. The US threatened to impose ‘tangible and important penalties’ on ICC officers, staff, and brokers, in addition to their quick members of the family, together with the blocking of property and belongings and the suspension of entry into the United States²⁰.
It ought to be famous that the primary particular person to face sanctions from the newly elected President was Karim Khan, Prosecutor of the ICC, who initiated issuance of an arrest warrant for the Russian President. In his Govt Order Trump, particularly, suspended Karim Khan’s entry into america, and his property that’s in or here- after comes inside the territory of america, is blocked²¹.
4.
But it was when it comes to the arrest warrants issued for heads of sovereign states that the ICC reached the top of nonsense and disutility, together with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin in respect of the scenario in Ukraine²². Passing such selections the ICC officers had been effectively conscious of the truth that they’d by no means deliver any sensible consequence, saving propaganda penalties clearly within the pursuits of the identical Anglo-Saxon world.
Judges and officers of the ICC positively shall not be thought-about insane or ignorant. These are skilled attorneys, who’re effectively conscious of the content material of worldwide treaties and the restrict of their authority. But they’ve by no means refused to carry out some ‘ideological put-up job’, particularly when it issues heads of sovereign states.
Establishing the Hague Felony Court²³ the events to the Rome Statute agreed on a compromise. On the one hand, the Statute stipulates that immunities of the Head of State or one other senior official of the state supplied by the worldwide regulation ‘shall not bar the Courtroom from exercising its jurisdiction over such an individual’ (article 27). However, in the identical doc the Courtroom commits itself to ‘acquiring the cooperation’ of a respective state for the waiver of the immunity of its senior official (article 98).
In reality the Hague Felony Courtroom with none waiver supplied by respective international locations launched the follow of issuing arrest warrants for sure performing heads of sovereign states (non-Western, as a rule). First warrants of this sort had been issued in respect of Sudan’s head of state Omar al-Bashir (in 2009) and Libya’s performing head of state Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi (in 2011). The case towards al-Gaddafi was terminated upon his dying; the arrest warrant for Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi, his son and companion, the de-facto Prime Minister of Libya, has not been enforced but, the case being on the stage of pre-trial listening to.
As for Omar al-Bashir, Sudan refused to implement the Courtroom’s warrant, stating that it was a ‘political’ doc which contradicted to the nationwide regulation, and the ICC itself didn’t have respective jurisdiction. Nor was the warrant enforced in quite a lot of ICC member states (Malawi, Jordan, Uganda, Chad, the RSA and others) which Omar al-Bashir visited. The authorized positions of a number of international locations from this listing had been thought-about by the ICC Judicial Divisions, which largely fashioned the Courtroom’s place on immunities of senior officers of the states which aren’t members of the ICC. The ICC’s opinion on this regard was principally expressed within the resolution of the Appeals Chamber regarding Jordan’s refusal to give up Omar al-Bashir.
Within the opinion of the ICC, ‘no immunities beneath customary worldwide regulation function in such a scenario to bar a global court docket in its train of its personal jurisdiction’²⁴. Thus, in essence, the ICC proceeds from the notion that there isn’t a rule of customary worldwide regulation which might give immunity from arrest and give up of the top of state which is not occasion to the Rome Statute by the state which is a member of the Statute on the premise of the request for arrest and give up issued by the Court²⁵.
Being fairly disputable, this and different assertions precipitated truthful criticism from consultants in worldwide regulation and, naturally, representatives of nationwide justice in varied international locations.
I wish to emphasise the next. Regardless of the interpretations of articles 27 and 98 of the Rome Statute, the very challenge of arrest warrants by the Hague Felony Courtroom for heads of sovereign states shall be certified as a violation of worldwide regulation, to start with, the UN Constitution. The explanations are as follows.
First, the UN Constitution provisions prevail over the Rome Statute, because it was talked about earlier.
Second, the precept of sovereign equality of all UN members is the premise of the UN (article 2). The heads of state symbolize the respective sovereign governments and by advantage of such fundamental supply of worldwide regulation as worldwide conventions they ‘get pleasure from full immunity from jurisdiction in different states, each civil and legal’²⁶. The violation of this by the Hague Felony Courtroom is an offence.
Third, the Hague tribunal’s encroachment on limitation of the sovereignty of a state (in case of Russia, furthermore, a everlasting member of the UN Safety Council) by means of pushing in the direction of an arrest of the top of state, thus impeding the efficiency of respective official features, shall be additionally certified as a violation of worldwide regulation. To start with, by advantage of the primary activity of the UN Safety Council being upkeep of worldwide peace and safety (article 24 of the UN Constitution).
Fourth, the Hague Felony court docket ignores the apparent undeniable fact that three out of 5 everlasting members of the UN Safety Council aren’t events to the Rome Statute. This resolution was at totally different occasions taken by China, Russia and the USA. Therefore by advantage of article 34 of the 1969 Vienna Conference on the Legislation of Treaties and customary worldwide law²⁷ the Rome Statute shall not create any obligations for the states which aren’t its members (article 34 of the 1969 Conference), together with these introduced by the Hague Felony Courtroom.
Fifth, the ICC officers shall perceive that making an attempt to restrict the actions of the top of state which is a everlasting member of the Safety Council they try and impede the functioning of the UN’s most important physique, which is completely answerable for selling peace. When the worldwide group is essentially divided and our planet is on the point of a 3rd world conflict, the ICC’s resolution in itself has elevated the worldwide danger. The duty for this growing menace to humanity lies on particular officers of the Hague Felony Courtroom as effectively.
5.
It’s well-known that even earlier than the high-profile ‘political put-up job’ in respect of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin the Hague Felony Courtroom usually needed to run fairly slippery errands of its clandestine puppet masters. After the 2014 coup in Kyiv aided by the USA²⁸, refusal of the individuals of Crimea and Donbass to recognise legitimacy of the coup, fixed shelling of Donbass on the route of Kyiv leaders and de- facto genocide of its inhabitants Russia took measures to guard compatriots. Not bothering itself with authorized evaluation of the abovementioned information and the relevant regulation the Hague Felony Courtroom obligingly supported the ‘authorized conflict’ towards our nation waged by the US and their satellites. A really contentious time period, the ‘aggression’, went into play. By the best way, it was included within the ICC jurisdiction solely after perennial discussions. By the point the Rome Statute was signed in 1998 the events had not managed to develop a legally acceptable definition of the time period ‘aggression’. This challenge was submitted to the Meeting, which in 2010 drafted amendments into the Statute. These included definition of a circle of individuals responsible for this crime and the process of bringing them to legal responsibility within the Hague Felony Courtroom. But the authorized requirements launched weren’t common.
Pressurised by the US the Particular Army Operation to defend Donbass within the paperwork of the UN Normal Meeting was known as ‘aggression’ by the arithmetic majority of states (United Nations Normal Meeting Decision ES-11/1 ‘Aggression towards Ukraine’ dated 2 March 2022; United Nations Normal Meeting Decision ES-11/2 ‘Humanitarian penalties of the aggression towards Ukraine’ dated 24 March 2022 and different paperwork of the UN Normal Meeting). Contribution was made by different organisations beneath Western management, particularly the Worldwide Financial Fund (the IMF)²⁹, the Institute of Worldwide Law³⁰ and others. Lastly, in March 2023 the Hague Felony Courtroom obediently introduced the issuance of arrest warrants for the President of the Russian Federation and the Russian Commissioner for kids’s rights.
From the authorized standpoint this transfer didn’t face up to any criticism. The Western international locations use the time period ‘aggression’ purely formally, within the which means assigned to it within the decision of the 1974 UN Normal Meeting. In keeping with the decision, aggression is ‘… the usage of armed pressure by a State towards the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of one other State, or in another method inconsistent with the Constitution of the United Nations…’ which ‘…offers rise to worldwide duty’³¹ (emphasis added). Making use of this definition to the Particular Army Operation, the Western states ignore main problems with the actual fact and regulation, to start with, the abovementioned upheaval in Kyiv in 2014 impressed by Washington, which was in apparent violation of article 2 (7) of the UN Constitution (on non-interference right into a state’s inner affairs). After this coup d’état Ukraine de facto was not a sovereign state.
One other circumstance ignored by the West as a complete is that the usage of armed forces permissible beneath the worldwide regulation (by the use of self-defence, together with preventive) just isn’t aggression. But the primary flaw within the worldwide authorized place of the Western states is extra severe: they ignore the truth that in accordance with the UN Constitution establishing the truth of ‘aggression’ and taking respective actions is solely the prerogative of the UN Safety Council, together with affirmative vote of its 5 everlasting members, however not one other physique, be it with the UN or not, or one other worldwide organisation.
Nonetheless, the states that are nonetheless events to the Rome Statute didn’t implement the ICC’s resolution as effectively. Russia’s President visited one in every of these international locations, Mongolia, early September 2024³². The go to proceeded in a heat and pleasant ambiance and ended fairly efficiently. The Hague Felony Courtroom acquired virtually hysterical. It instantly cracked down on Mongolia, stating that it failed to satisfy its commitments beneath the Rome Statute because it had not arrested Russia’s President, thus failing to adjust to the ICC’s cooperation request.
In keeping with the ICC, events to the Rome Statute shall arrest individuals for whom the Courtroom has issued warrants, ‘regardless of their official standing or nationality’. On this context the assertion made by the ICC that it performs its features in respect of ‘gross violations of the basics of worldwide regulation’³³ sounds fairly cynical. But interfering with the official duties of the top of a sovereign state which is a everlasting member of the Safety Council the officers of the Hague Felony Courtroom irritate the danger of failure to move selections when it comes to the us reacting to threats to world peace.
Within the doc of the Hague Felony Courtroom accusing Mongolia of non-compliance by Mongolia with the request to cooperate beneath the Rome Statute it’s said that article 98(1) allegedly doesn’t amend article 27(2) or present for any exceptions, i.e. within the Courtroom’s opinion, the Statute doesn’t present for ‘the waiver of the immunity’ for heads of sovereign states. In keeping with the Courtroom, another interpretation would render the obligations of member states ‘mindless’ and the general Courtroom’s system ‘futile’, ‘opposite to the precept of effectiveness (ut res magis valeat quam pereat)’³⁴, stemming from article 31 of the Vienna Conference on the Legislation of Treaties, ‘in accordance with which treaties ought to be interpreted in order to make sure their efficient implementation’³⁵. ‘Futility’ is to not be disputed. The Hague Felony Courtroom has displayed this high quality again and again.
As for the effectiveness precept, it ought to be stated that the argument given by the Courtroom is distorted. In the midst of interpretation of worldwide treaties an interpreter ‘should give which means and impact to all of the phrases of the treaty’ and ‘an interpreter just isn’t free to undertake a studying that may lead to decreasing complete clauses or paragraphs of a treaty to redundancy or inutility’³⁶.
It ought to be talked about that earlier the ICC recognised that there’s an ‘inherent pressure’ between articles 27(2) and 98(1) of the Statute³⁷, this pressure being substantively analysed within the doctrine³⁸. All of the abovementioned clearly demonstrates authorized and technical flaws within the Statute³⁹, which make this already imperfect instrument completely inapplicable.
In its Choice on Mongolia the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber said that article 34 of the Vienna Conference ‘is irrelevant to the matter at hand (whether or not the non-member events are certain by the Statute – comment), because the Courtroom just isn’t aiming to impose obligations contained within the Statute to non-States Events, however is fairly searching for the cooperation of States Events in instances towards people who allegedly dedicated crimes beneath article 5 of the Statute on the territory of a State the place the Courtroom has jurisdiction’. But this place is invalid as effectively: non-provision of immunity by occasion to the Statute to the top of state which isn’t occasion to the Statute is extension of the Statute to such state, because the latter has the best to assert immunities for his or her senior officers, whereas the host nation has the duty to grant such immunities. If the latter doesn’t do this by advantage of article 27.2 of the Statute, it shall both be thought-about to be in violation of customary worldwide regulation or extending the rule of article 27.2 of the Statute to the third state and its senior officers. There is no such thing as a third method.
The ICC displayed important self-confidence when confirmed that ‘any controversial bilateral obligation that Mongolia could owe to the Russian Federation to respect any relevant immunity that worldwide regulation could enable to Heads of State just isn’t able to displacing the duty that Mongolia owes to the Courtroom, which is tasked with exercising its jurisdiction…⁴⁰. That’s true: any worldwide acts are inferior to the Statute, within the opinion of the biased commentators from the Courtroom.
In its correspondence with the Hague Felony Courtroom Mongolia referred to the customary authorized rule of immunities of the heads of states and the Worldwide Courtroom of Justice’s (‘ICJ’) judgment within the Arrest Warrant case as of 11 April 2000, which confirmed its existence. In response the Hague Courtroom reiterated its place: ‘whereas private immunities function in relations between States, they don’t defend people, together with Heads of State, from prosecution by worldwide legal courts’, justifying this by stating that the ICC ‘is inherently unbiased of States, strictly neutral and acts within the normal pursuits of the worldwide group’⁴¹.
All these arguments are completely politicised and legally null and void. However, the Courtroom pathetically said that Mongolia prevented the Courtroom ‘…from exercising its features and powers…’ and ‘didn’t adjust to its worldwide obligations beneath the Statute…’⁴², thus rejecting all Mongolia’s objections.
It ought to be talked about that beneath article 98.2 of the Rome Statute ‘the Courtroom could not proceed with a request for give up which might require the requested State to behave inconsistently with its obligations beneath worldwide agreements pursuant to which the consent of a sending State is required to give up an individual of that State to the Courtroom, except the Courtroom can first get hold of the cooperation of the sending State for the giving of consent for the give up’. The 2019 Treaty on Pleasant Relations and Complete Strategic Partnership between the Russian Federation and Mongolia (entered into pressure in September 2020) is relevant on this sense. In keeping with article 4 of this treaty Russia and Mongolia shall ‘abstain from participation in any actions or help of such actions directed towards the opposite occasion’.
All this judicial fuss didn’t have any important penalties for Mongolia or Russia. The ICC Meeting decides itself on the measures to be taken towards the ‘disobedient’. The Statute doesn’t present for any sanctions towards a member state which did not comprehensively cooperate with the ICC in the midst of exercising its features. In follow such sanctions have by no means been imposed. The pinnacle of Sudan Omar al-Bashir in seven years after the ICC issued its first arrest warrant in 2009 visited greater than 20 international locations, together with the ICC members, but in none of them was he arrested⁴³. No measures had been taken towards these states, though the arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir was issued within the framework of the case initiated by the UN Safety Council (which, not like the ICC, has the best to use worldwide authorized sanctions).
This proves to what extent the Courtroom and its selections are futile. However, one shouldn’t underestimate the scope and attainable penalties of the ‘authorized conflict’ the Western international locations proceed to battle towards Russia utilizing worldwide justice, together with different hostile actions and illegal restrictions. In essence, the ICC follow is nearly able to legally justify kidnapping officers who get pleasure from immunities from the territories of the international locations which aren’t events to the Rome Statute, extra in order that the ICC has not solely change into a funnel wherein any official of any state could also be drawn, in case there’s a political order, but additionally a commonplace software of political battle. To say nothing of arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, the scenario with the start of the ICC’s investigation into the scenario within the Republic of the Philippines and the resultant arrest on 11 March 2025 and give up to the ICC of the ex-President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte is sort of exemplary.
On 15 September 2021 the Pre-Trial Chamber authorised the ICC Prosecutor’s in- vestigation of the scenario within the Republic of the Philippines in respect of crimes which fall beneath the ICC jurisdiction which allegedly had been dedicated within the nation between 1 November 2011 and 16 March 2019 within the framework of the so-called ‘conflict on medication’ campaign⁴⁴. This resolution and additional occasions are outstanding within the following respect. First, the ICC didn’t have jurisdiction ratione temporis in respect of this example generally, because the investigation was authorised by the Chamber on 15 September 2021, whereas the Philippines withdrew from the Statute on 17 March 2019. Nonetheless, this didn’t forestall the ICC judges from discovering the premise for this jurisdiction as regards to its personal follow of interpretation of artwork.127 of the Rome Statute⁴⁵ basing on the precept of ‘if you would like it, you’ll be able to’. Second, the arrest and give up to the ICC of the ex-President of the Philippines Rodrigo Duterte weren’t the popularity of the ICC jurisdiction by the Philippines, not a celebration to the Statute, however a give up by the Marcos clan (Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos Jr. is the present President of the Philippines) of their political opponent from the Duterte clan⁴⁶, i.e. the ICC in actual fact turned a software of clan rivalry within the territory of the Philippines. Thus, media opinion that the authorization of the investigation within the Philippines is ‘casting a darkish shadow on the power of the court docket to do its job independently’⁴⁷ fairly precisely displays the transformation of the very essence of the Courtroom: from an instrument of justice it has become an instrument of soiled politics.
It’s unclear what lawlessness we are going to witness additional on. The West, which is shortly dropping its positions on the planet and isn’t capable of impose its will on nearly all of the humankind, goes for broke and can cease at nothing. This hazard shall be considered. I, for one, have already speculated on what could comply with the enforcement of an unlawful resolution of the ICC in respect of the top of state which isn’t occasion to the ICC. The very enforcement of such resolution could also be thought-about as casus belli in respect of the international locations which participated in it. It’s unnecessary to debate how harmful such selections could also be in respect of the top of state of a nuclear energy and everlasting member of the UN Safety Council. To say nothing of the truth that individuals accountable for such selections could and shall be prosecuted by investigative and judicial our bodies of the nation the top of which is illegally dropped at legal responsibility.
6.
It ought to be remembered that amongst international locations which accuse Russia of ‘aggression’ aren’t solely the USA⁴⁸. Related pronouncements had been made by the NATO member states⁴⁹, in addition to most members of the Council of Europe and the seven most superior economies, G7⁵⁰. The African union joined the efforts to accuse Russia of violating the worldwide regulation, encroachment of ‘territorial integrity and nationwide sovereignty of Ukraine’⁵¹.
But one shouldn’t be happy that resolutions of the UN Normal Meeting aren’t formally legally binding. In follow in financial arbitration and judicial proceedings towards Russia and Russian residents references to such paperwork are essential for the ‘internal conviction’ of the choose or arbitrator.
Even ungrounded accusations require exhaustive reply. On this respect I think about it essential to reiterate our place in respect of the so-called ‘aggression’ of which the West persistently accuses Russia, and the ICC actions as makes an attempt to offer authorized impact to those accusations.
Allow us to summarise the above.
First. After the upheaval in 2014 the ability in Kyiv was taken by a dependent political regime beneath full management of the Western international locations. A part of former Ukraine, intoxicated and managed by it, de facto is not a sovereign state. Subsequently, Russia’s defence of Donbass, which didn’t recognise the coup and was attacked by the unlawful 2014 Kyiv authorities, can’t be legally certified as ‘aggression’.
Second. Below the UN Constitution establishing the actual fact of ‘aggression’ and performing on this respect is the prerogative of the UN Safety Council (together with affirmative vote of 5 states that are its everlasting members). No different physique, be it with the UN or not, or one other worldwide organisation have such powers. Their statements aren’t legally grounded and null.
Third. Encroachment of the Hague Felony Courtroom on limiting sovereignty of a state which is a everlasting member of the UN Safety Council (calls for of the arrest of the top of this state, thus interfering with the official features) is to be certified as an offence towards worldwide regulation. Firstly as a result of the UN Safety Council bears major duty for upkeep of worldwide peace and safety (article 24 of the UN Constitution).
Fourth. Russia just isn’t occasion to the Rome statute of 1998, on the premise of which the Worldwide Felony Courtroom was established. In 2016 Russia refused to be occasion to this worldwide treaty. Subsequently, the Statute doesn’t create any obligations for our nation.
Fifth. The actions of the Hague Felony Courtroom and its place contradict to the precept of ‘pacta tertiis nес nocent nес prosunt’ (a treaty doesn’t create obligations or rights for a 3rd state with out its consent) enshrined in customary worldwide regulation and article 34 of the 1969 Vienna Conference on the Legislation of Treaties.
Sixth. In keeping with the Rome Statute, the thought behind issuing an arrest warrant is that the ICC requires a chance to additional oblige the Statute member states, particularly, to arrest the particular person for whom the warrant has been issued and give up this particular person to the Courtroom (article 58 of the Rome Statute). But in case this particular person enjoys immunity as an official of the state which isn’t occasion to the Statute, and the Hague Felony Courtroom has not solicited help from such state, issuance of such a war- rant and the Courtroom’s request to a member state to arrest the abovementioned particular person contradict to article 98 of the Statute.
Seventh. The President of the Russian Federation, being the present head of a sovereign state, is totally immune from overseas legal justice: each ratione materiae⁵² and ratione personae⁵³. In case there isn’t a specific waiver of this immunity the worldwide judicial our bodies don’t have any jurisdiction over the top of the sovereign state.
Eighth. In keeping with the judgment of the worldwide Courtroom of Justice dated 14 February 2002 within the case ‘Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000’, ‘in worldwide regulation it’s firmly established that, as additionally diplomatic and consular brokers, sure holders of high-ranking workplace in a State, such because the Head of State, Head of Authorities and Minister for Overseas Affairs, get pleasure from immunities from jurisdiction in different States, each civil and legal’⁵⁴. The truth that this rule of worldwide regulation operates additionally in instances when there come up a query of risk of arrest the top of the state which isn’t occasion to the Rome Statute by a state which is occasion to the Rome Statute is recognised within the doctrine as well⁵⁵. Furthermore, in a single case the ICC recognised the actual fact there are not any exceptions to this rule in respect to the conditions when the state operates in its name⁵⁶.
Article 27 of the Rome Statute, within the which means of which immunities of an official shall not impede jurisdiction in respect of this particular person, contradicts to the established customary worldwide regulation. That this doc permits for legal prosecution of cur- hire heads of sovereign states doesn’t adjust to elementary rules of worldwide regulation enshrined within the UN Constitution, firstly, the precept of the sovereign equality of all its members, non-involvement into within the inner politics of one other state.
Ninth. As of February 2025 125 states are events to the Rome Statute⁵⁷ (within the UN there are 193 members)⁵⁸. Regardless of their quantity, the ICC doesn’t symbolize the worldwide group of states as a complete and doesn’t act in its identify. Three out of 5 everlasting members of the UN Safety Council aren’t events to it (Russia, China and the USA), together with industrialised and densely populated Asian international locations (India, Pakistan, Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia), many Arab countries⁵⁹.
Tenth. Judges, prosecutors and different officers who took illegal selections could and shall be prosecuted for crimes stipulated in the Russian legal regulation.
7.
In respect of the place said above an inexpensive query arises: what’s in retailer for the worldwide legal justice generally? Russian attorneys ought to voice complete and well-based skilled criticism of the ICC selections in any respect boards. They need to current worldwide authorized place of Russia in respect of the Particular Army Operation, Ukrainian battle and different related difficult points to the worldwide authorized group, media and folks in numerous international locations. They need to make clear controversies, and do this actively and incessantly. They need to reiterate our dedication to the UN Constitution and to start with rules of sovereign equality of all states, non- interference with their inner affairs. They need to guarantee positive that particular officers of the Hague Felony Courtroom who violate these rules be taken to legal responsibility in accordance with worldwide and Russian nationwide regulation.
It appears totally attainable to develop on the regional stage (as an illustration, within the framework of BRICS) an idea of building a global authorized physique as an alternative choice to the Hague Felony Courtroom. This new judicial physique in BRICS might reiterate the frequent dedication of its member states to the UN Constitution rules, together with the rules of immunity of heads of sovereign states from any overseas jurisdiction and non-interference into inner affairs of the states, together with by the use of illegal overseas instructing of opposition leaders.
As for the ICC, sadly, at this level we have to recognise its complete inefficiency in performing its most important activity – bringing to legal responsibility all these responsible of genocide, aggression, conflict crimes, those that escaped punishment beneath nationwide regulation. All of them, together with residents of Western international locations and NATO member states. In fact, it’s uncertain that the Hague Felony Courtroom in its current kind and function will make efforts to this finish. That’s the reason it shall sink into oblivion.
But a thirst for justice that unites all individuals on the planet is stronger than any sanctions, stress, hypocrisy and lies. And the worldwide regulation developed by the worldwide group is stronger than the rule of pressure. If the Hague Courtroom is irreversibly flawed at current, the states will discover a chance to ascertain a special inter- nationwide legal court docket which shall be spared of those flaws. Its constitution shall be based mostly upon all universally recognised guidelines of worldwide regulation, together with the rule of absolute immunity of senior officers. Its jurisdiction could also be prolonged to the crimes of genocide, conflict crimes, crimes towards humanity, and terrorist assaults. Such assaults are sometimes pre- pared and dedicated on the territories of two or extra states. Worldwide cooperation within the framework of this new physique will be capable to forestall them.
There’s a hope that this new court docket will be capable to attain the targets declared within the Rome Statute of the ICC which the ICC itself proved unable to realize.
¹ See: Schabas W. A. Chapter 1: The dynamics of the Rome Convention in The Elgar Companion to the Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Ed. by M. deGuzman and V. Oosterveld. Cheltenham; Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing Restricted, 2020. P. 4–5. See additionally: Summaries of the Work of the Worldwide Legislation Fee: Draft code of crimes towards the peace and safety of mankind (Half II) — together with the draft Statute for a global legal court docket // Worldwide Legislation Fee. Obtainable at: https://authorized.un.org/ilc/summaries/7_4.shtml (accessed: 03.02.2025); Worldwide legal duty of people and entities engaged in illicit trafficking in narcotic medication throughout nationwide frontiers and different transnational legal actions: Institution of a global legal court docket with jurisdiction over such crimes // World Authorized Data Institute. Obtainable at: http://www.worldlii.org/int/different/UNGA/1989/52.pdf (accessed: 03.02.2025).
² “Nobody is choose in his personal case” (In Latin).
³ Many publications have been written in regards to the ICC. For the newest publications see: The Previous, Current and Way forward for the Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Ed. by A. Heinze, V. E. Dittrich. Brussels: Torkel Opsahl Educational EPublisher, 2021. XXI, 783 p.; Commentary on the Legislation of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom: The Statute. Vol. 1. Eds.: M. Klamberg, J. Nilsson, A. Angotti. 2nd ed. Brussels: Torkel Opsahl Educational Epublisher, 2023. 1104 p.
⁴ See: Order of the President of the Russian Federation No. 361-rp dated 16.11.2016 “On the intention of the Russian Federation to not be occasion to the Rome Statute of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom” // President of Russia. Obtainable at: http://www.kremlin.ru/acts/financial institution/41387 (accessed: 04.02.2025). Additionally see the communication of the federal government of the Russian Federation to the UN Secretary Normal obtained 30.11.2016: Rome Statute of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom: Rome, 17 July 1998: [status as at: 14.02.2025 10:15:47 EDT] // United Nations Treaty Assortment. Obtainable at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XVIII-10&chapter=18&clang=_en#9 (accessed: 14.02.2025).
⁵ See, for instance: Worldwide Legislation and the Combat towards Crime / pref. A. V. Zmeevskii, Yu. M. Kolosov. M., 1997. (In Russian)
⁶ W. Schabas writes in regards to the ICC as follows: “Solely few concluded instances matter. Lots of these accused had been insignificant individuals in little-known conflicts. With sentences of 12 or 13 years in jail it’s onerous to imagine that the Courtroom offers with ‘those that bear biggest duty’ for ‘most severe crimes of concern to the worldwide group as a complete’‘ (Schabas W. A. Op. cit. P. 19).
⁷ Bosco D. Why is the Worldwide Felony Courtroom choosing solely on Africa? (March 29, 2013) // The Washington Put up. Obtainable at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-the-international-criminal-court-picking-only-on-africa/2013/03/29/cb9bf5da-96f7-11e2-97cd-3d8c1afe4f0f_story.html (accessed: 04.02.2025).
⁸ See: Bachmann S.-D. D., Sowatey-Adjei N. A. The African Union-ICC Controversy Earlier than the ICJ: A Manner Ahead to Strengthen Worldwide Felony Justice? // Washington Worldwide Legislation Journal. Vol. 29. 2020. No. 2. P. 249.
⁹ Ibid. P. 249–250.
¹⁰ The Philippines’ membership within the ICC involves an finish // Coalition for the Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://coalitionfortheicc.org/information/20190315/philippines-leaves-icc#:~:textual content=Aspercent20ofpercent2017percent20Marchpercent2Cpercent20the,afterpercent20Burundipercent20withdrewpercent20inpercent202017 (accessed: 04.02.2025).
¹¹ For conflict crimes in Afghanistan in additional element, see: Ning Y. How US evades duty for conflict crimes in Afghanistan // World Occasions. Obtainable at: https://www.globaltimes.cn/web page/202109/1235240.shtml (accessed: 14.02.2025).
¹² Pre-Trial Chamber II: Scenario within the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, No. ICC-02/17 // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/court-record/icc-02/17-33 (accessed: 04.02.2025).
¹³ The Appeals Chamber: Scenario within the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, No. ICC-02/17 OA4 // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2020_00828.PDF (accessed: 04.02.2025).
¹⁴ Worldwide Felony Courtroom: U. S. Sanctions in Response to Investigation of Battle Crimes in Afghanistan // Congressional Analysis Service. Obtainable at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11428 (accessed: 04.02.2025).
¹⁵ Worldwide Felony Courtroom: U. S. Sanctions in Response to Investigation of Battle Crimes in Afghanistan // Congressional Analysis Service. Obtainable at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11428 (accessed: 04.02.2025).
¹⁶ Political and authorized students haven’t reached consensus over the time period ‘sanctions’ (see: Pyatibratov I. S. Sanctions and unilateral restrictive measures: The issue of delineation of phrases and identification of phenomena Gumanitarnye nauki. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta. 2020. Vol. 10, no. 6. P. 64. (In Russian)). However, the usage of “sanctions” in respect of restrictive measures taken by states unilaterally with out a respective resolution of the UN Safety Council has been repeatedly criticised by some students (see, as an illustration: Ryzhova M. V. Financial sanctions in fashionable worldwide regulation PhD in Legislation thesis summary Kazan. P. 8. (In Russian); Kritskiy Okay. V. The phrases “worldwide sanctions” and “unilateral restrictive measures”. Moskovskii zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava. 2016. No. 2. P. 2. (In Russian); Kritskiy Okay. V. Sanctions and unilateral restrictive measures in fashionable worldwide regulation PhD in Legislation thesis Moscow. P. 10. (In Russian); Alekseeva D. G., Alimova Y. O., Barzilova I. S. Legislation beneath sanctions / M. V. Mazhorina, B. A. Shakhnazarov (eds). Moscow, Prospekt Publ. P. 93–94. (In Russian). This criticism is justified: whereas the time period “sanction” is considered as a coercive measure utilized within the case of an offence, i.e. a lawful measure, restrictive measures utilized by states unilaterally with out a resolution of the UN Safety Council aren’t at all times lawful. On this respect, it’s a minimum of inaccurate to name the latter ‘sanctions’ within the authorized sense. It’s no coincidence that coercive measures adopted by the UN Safety Council are sometimes known as ‘sanctions’ in UN paperwork, whereas regimes created by these measures are known as ‘sanctions regimes’ (see: Doc A/56/10: Report of the Worldwide Legislation Fee on the work of its fifty-third session (23 April – 1 June and a pair of July – 10 August 2001) // Yearbook of the Worldwide Legislation Fee. 2001. Vol. II. P. 2. p. 78; Decision 2170 (2014), adopted by the Safety Council at its 7242nd assembly, on 15 August 2014 (S/RES/2170). Obtainable at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/report/777420/information/S_RES_2170percent282014percent29-RU.pdf?ln=ru (accessed: 06.03.2025); Subsidiary Organs of the United Nations Safety Council // Reality Sheets. Obtainable at: https://most important.un.org/securitycouncil/websites/default/information/subsidiary_organs_series_7sep23_.pdf (accessed: 06.03.2025)). Quite the opposite, in sure UN acts the time period ‘sanctions’ just isn’t used to confer with unilateral coercive measures (see, as an illustration, Decision “Human rights and unilateral coercive measures”, adopted by the Normal Meeting on 19 December 2016 (A/RES/71/193). Obtainable at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/report/857550/information/A_RES_71_193-RU.pdf?ln=ru (accessed: 06.03.2025)). However, in political and journalistic discourses such measures are generally known as “sanctions” (see: Gevorgyan Okay. “Unilateral Sanctions” and Worldwide Legislation // The Worldwide Affairs. Obtainable at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/materials/720 (accessed: 06.03.2025). (In Russian)). On this article, for the sake of comfort, the time period “sanctions” is used inter alia to outline unilateral coercive measures utilized by states with out a resolution of the UN Safety Council.
¹⁷ Blocking Property of Sure Individuals Related to the Worldwide Felony Courtroom Designations // Workplace of Overseas Property Management. Obtainable at: https://ofac.treasury.gov/recent-actions/20200902 (accessed: 05.02.2025); US imposes sanctions on high worldwide legal court docket officers // The Guardian. Obtainable at: https://www.theguardian.com/regulation/2020/sep/02/us-sanctions-international-criminal-court-fatou-bensouda (accessed: 05.02.2025). Later Govt Order N 13928 was repealed (see: Govt Order 14022 of April 1, 2021 “Termination of Emergency With Respect to the Worldwide Felony Courtroom” // Federal Register. Obtainable at: https://ofac.treasury.gov/media/57411/obtain?inline (accessed: 05.02.2025)).
¹⁸ Imposing Sanctions on the Worldwide Felony Courtroom: Govt order, February 6, 2025 // The White Home. Obtainable at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/imposing-sanctions-on-the-international-criminal-court/ (accessed: 14.02.2025).
¹⁹ Ibid.
²⁰ Ibid.
²¹ Ibid.
²² Scenario in Ukraine: ICC judges challenge arrest warrants towards Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/information/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and (accessed: 05.02.2025). Additionally see: Issues of Legality of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom: Issues of Legality of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom (Opinion of the Worldwide Legislation Advisory Board beneath the Ministry of Overseas Affairs of the Russian Federation), // Ministry of Overseas Affairs of the Russian Federation. Obtainable at: https://www.mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/legal_problems_of-international_cooperation/1949021/ (accessed: 05.02.2025); Opinion of the Worldwide Legislation Advisory Board beneath the Ministry of Overseas Affairs of the Russian Federation: Issues of Legality of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom [translated by grad. students V. V. Pchelintseva and A. M. Korzhenyak) // Moscow Journal of Inter- national Law. 2024. no. 2. P. 92–104.
²³ Being the main subjects of international law, the states may on the basis of treaties between them establish a derivative subject of international law, for instance, an intergovernmental organisation, an international judiciary etc. The competence of this derivative subject is defined by the states which established it. See: Shaw M. N. International Law. 6th ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. P. 1303. In this respect J. Klabbers rightfully said about international organisations: “Organisations are creatures of their member states…” (Klabbers J. International Law. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. P. 92).
²⁴ The Appeals Chamber: Situation in Darfur, Sudan: in the Case of the Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al-Bashir: Judgment in the Jordan Referral re Al-Bashir Appeal, No. ICC-02/05-01/09 OA2, 6 May 2019, para. 114 // International Criminal Court. Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CourtRecords/CR2019_02856.PDF (accessed: 14.02.2025).
²⁵ See: ibid, para. 117.
²⁶ The existence of this convention in international law was conformed by the International Court of Justice. See: Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2002, p. 3, para. 51.
²⁷ See: Document A/6309/Rev.1: Reports of the International Law Commission on the second part of its seventeenth session and on its eighteenth session // Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1966. Vol. II. New York: United Nations, 1967. P. 226.
²⁸ Preparation for the non-constitutional upheaval in Kyiv, instructions given to the rebels by the US Embassy are comprehensively described in the book by former Ukrainian PM N. Azarov, who earlier worked with the lawfully elected Ukrainian President, V. Yanukovych. See: Azarov N. Ukraine at a Crossroads. Notes from the Prime Minister Moscow, Veche Publ, 2015. 512 p. (In Russian)
²⁹ A specialised UN institution Russia is a member of. For the IMF see its site: About the IMF // International Monetary Fund. Available at: https://www.imf.org/en/About (accessed: 05.02.2025).
³⁰ A non-governmental organisation. Established in 1873. For more details see its site: About the Institute // Institut de Droit International. Available at: https://www.idi-iil.org/en/a-propos/ (accessed: 05.02.2025).
³¹ See its articles 1, 5 (Definition of aggression: [appendix to UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) dated 14.12.1974]. Obtainable at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/report/190983/information/A_ RES_3314percent28XXIXpercent29-RU.pdf?ln=ru (accessed: 14.02.2025)).
³² Official go to to Mongolia // President of Russia. Obtainable at: http://www.kremlin.ru/occasions/president/journeys/75016 (accessed: 05.02.2025).
³³ ICC: Mongolia’s refusal to arrest Putin was submitted for consideration of the Meeting // United Nations Organisation. Alailable at: https://information.un.org/ru/story/2024/10/1457701 (accessed: 05.02.2025).
³⁴ “In order that the matter could flourish fairly than perish” (In Latin).
³⁵ Pre-Trial Chamber II: Scenario in Ukraine. Discovering beneath article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Mongolia with the request by the Courtroom to cooperate within the arrest and give up of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and referral to the Meeting of States Events, No. ICC-01/22, 24 October 2024, para. 34. // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/websites/default/information/CourtRecords/0902ebd1809d1971.pdf (accessed: 05.02.2025).
³⁶ Korea – Definitive Safeguard Measure on Imports of Sure Dairy Merchandise: Report of the Appellate Physique (adopted on 12 January 2000), AB-1999-8 (WT/DS98/AB/R), para. 80.
³⁷ Pre-Trial Chamber I. Scenario in Darfur, Sudan: The Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, No. ICC-02/05-01/09, 13 December 2011, para. 37. // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/8c9d80/pdf (accessed: 05.02.2025).
³⁸ See, as an illustration: Ispolinov A. S. Anatomy of a Disaster: Issues of Normative Legitimacy of an Worldwide Felony Courtroom // Zakon. 2024. no. 2. P. 130–131. (In Russian); Kjeldgaard-Pedersen A. Is the High quality of the ICC’s Authorized Reasoning an Impediment to Its Means to Deter Worldwide Crimes? // iCourts: iCourts Working Paper Collection. 2020. no. 191. P. 15–17. Obtainable at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Supply.cfm/SSRN_ID3570447_code2133408.pdf?abstractid=3570447&mirid=1&kind=2 (accessed: 05.02.2025); Tladi D. The ICC Selections on Chad and Malawi: On Cooperation, Immunities, and Article 98 // Journal of Worldwide Felony Justice. Vol. 11. 2013. no. 1. P. 199–221; Van Alebeek R. The Immunity of States and Their Officers in Worldwide Felony Legislation and Worldwide Human Rights Legislation. Oxford; New York: Oxford College Press, 2008. P. 278.
³⁹ Students’ opinion that ‘… the Courtroom’s structure is significantly flawed’ appears to be like well-grounded (Schabas W. A. Op. cit. P. 19).
⁴⁰ Pre-Trial Chamber II: Scenario in Ukraine. Discovering beneath article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by Mongolia with the request by the Courtroom to cooperate within the arrest and give up of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and referral to the Meeting of States Events, No. ICC-01/22, 24 October 2024, para. 28.
⁴¹ Ibid, paras. 6, 29, 30.
⁴² See: ibid, para. 38 and findings.
⁴³ See: ICC arrest warrant? No worries for Sudan’s Bashir who visited 22 international locations in 7 years // World Tribune: Window on the Actual World. Obtainable at: https://www.worldtribune.com/icc-arrest-warrant-no-worries-for-sudans-bashir-who-visited-22-countries-in-7-years/ (accessed: 14.02.2025); Nuba Experiences. Sudan’s president has made 74 journeys the world over within the seven years he’s been needed for conflict crimes // Quartz. Obtainable at: https://qz.com/africa/630571/sudans-president-has-made-74-trips-across-the-world-in-the-seven-years-hes-been-wanted-for-war-crimes (accessed: 14.02.2025).
⁴⁴ Pre-Trial Chamber I: Scenario within the Republic of the Philippines: Choice on the Prosecutor’s request for authorisation of an investigation pursuant to Article 15(3) of the Statute, No. ICC-01/21 // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/websites/default/information/CourtRecords/CR2021_08044.PDF (accessed: 18.03.2025).
⁴⁵ See: Ibid, para. 111.
⁴⁶ Filatov S. Duterte’s arrest and its implications for the Philippines, the US and China // The Worldwide Affairs. Obtainable at: https://interaffairs.ru/information/present/50683 (accessed: 18.03.2025); Smith T. The ICC caught in clan rivalry in Philippines // Justiceinfo.web. Obtainable at: https://www.justiceinfo.web/en/140756-icc-caught-clan-rivalry-philippines.html (accessed: 18.03.2025).
⁴⁷ Smith T. Op. cit.
⁴⁸ US President Joe Biden accused Russia of violation of the UN Constitution because it allegedly ‘waged a brutal unnecessary conflict’ towards Ukraine (‘President Biden … accused Russia of violating the United Nations worldwide constitution in its “brutal, unnecessary conflict” towards Ukraine’). See: Biden in UN speech accuses Russia of “extraordinarily important” violation of worldwide constitution // Fox Information. Obtainable at: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-un-speech-accuses-russia-extremely-significant-violation-international-charter (accessed: 05.02.2025).
⁴⁹ The World Reacts to Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine // Lawfare. Obtainable at: https://www.lawfare-media.org/article/world-reacts-russias-invasion-ukraine (accessed: 05.02.2025).
⁵⁰ G7 Leaders’ Assertion on the invasion of Ukraine by armed forces of the Russian Federation // Council of the European Union. Obtainable at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2022/02/24/g7-leaders-statement-on-the-invasion-of-ukraine-by-armed-forces-of-the-russian-federation/ (accessed: 14.02.2025).
⁵¹ Macky Sall, Chair of the African Union and President of Senegal, and Moussa Faki Mahamat, Chairpersonn of the African Union Fee, particularly, known as on the Russian Federation to ‘… imperatively respect worldwide regulation, the territorial integrity and nationwide sovereignty of Ukraine’ (Assertion from Chair of the African Union, H. E President Macky Sall and Chairperson of the AU Fee H.E Moussa Faki Mahamat, on the scenario in Ukraine // African Union. Obtainable at: https://au.int/en/pressreleases/20220224/african-union-statement-situation-ukraine (accessed: 05.02.2025)).
⁵² Below ‘ratione materiae’ immunity we perceive immunity from overseas legal justice in respect of an official of the state relating to actions this particular person executes inside the framework of the mandate and which may be outlined as ‘formal actions’.
⁵³ Subjective scope of ‘ratione personae’ immunity: the top of state, head of presidency and the minister of overseas affairs are immune from legal justice of a overseas state. ‘Ratione personae’ immunity is recognised routinely, in accordance with the rule of worldwide regulation, in respect of public authorities which symbolize the state in worldwide relations. This immunity is utilized in respect of all actions (whether or not non-public or formal) dedicated by the representatives of the state.
⁵⁴ Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium), Judgment, I.C.J. Experiences 2002, p. 3, para. 51.
⁵⁵ See, as an illustration: Ispolinov A. S. Attempting on the Ring of Omnipotence: The Worldwide Felony Courtroom and the Immunities of Heads of State // Rossiiskii iuridicheskii zhurnal. 2023. No. 2. P. 40, 52–53. (In Russian); Akande D. Worldwide Legislation Immunities and the Worldwide Felony Courtroom // The American Journal of Worldwide Legislation. 2004. Vol. 98. no. 3. P. 410–411, 421.
⁵⁶ Within the resolution on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request by the Courtroom for the arrest and give up of Omar Al-Bashir the Pre-Trial Chamber, referring to the identical paragraph 51 of the ICJ judgment dated 14 February 2002 in case ‘Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000’, said: “The Chamber is unable to establish a rule in customary worldwide regulation that may exclude immunity for Heads of State when their arrest is searched for worldwide crimes by one other State, even when the arrest is sought on behalf of a global court docket, together with, particularly, this Courtroom (Writer’s observe: the ICC)” (Pre-Trial Chamber II. Scenario in Darfur, Sudan: within the Case of the Prosecutor v. Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir: Choice beneath article 87(7) of the Rome Statute on the non-compliance by South Africa with the request by the Courtroom for the arrest and give up of Omar Al-Bashir, No. ICC-02/05-01/09, 6 July 2017, para. 68 // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/68ffc1/pdf (accessed: 15.02.2025)).
⁵⁷ The States Events to the Rome Statute // Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Obtainable at: https://asp.icc-cpi.int/states-parties (accessed: 05.02.2025).
⁵⁸ Constitution of the United Nations: Standing as at: 14-02-2025 10:15:47 EDT // United Nations Treaty Assortment. Obtainable at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=I-1&chapter=1&clang=_en (accessed: 14.02.2025).
⁵⁹ From the attitude of the inhabitants figures in non-member states this is almost all of the Earth’s inhabitants.
References
Akande, Dapo. 2004. Worldwide Legislation Immunities and the Worldwide Felony Courtroom. The American Journal of Worldwide Legislation 98 (3): 407–433.
Alekseeva, Diana G., Yana O., Alimova, Inna S., Barzilova et. al. 2023. Legislation beneath sanctions. Mazhorina M. V., Shakhnazarov B. A. (eds). Moscow, Prospekt Publ. (In Russian)
Azarov, Nikolay. 2015. Ukraine at a Crossroads. Notes from the Prime Minister. Moscow, Veche Publ. (In Russian)
Bachmann, Sascha-Dominick D., Sowatey-Adjei, Naa A. 2020. The African Union-ICC Controversy Earlier than the ICJ: A Manner Ahead to Strengthen Worldwide Felony Justice? Washington Worldwide Legislation Journal 29 (2): 247–301.
Bosco, David. 2013. Why is the Worldwide Felony Courtroom choosing solely on Africa? The Washington Put up. March 29. Obtainable at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-the-international-criminal-court-picking-only-on-africa/2013/03/29/cb9bf5da-96f7-11e2-97cd-3d8c1afe4f0f_story.html (accessed: 04.02.2025).
Commentary on the Legislation of the Worldwide Felony Courtroom: The Statute. Vol. 1. 2023. Klamberg M., Nilsson J., Angotti A. (eds). 2nd ed. Brussels, Torkel Opsahl Educational Epublisher. 1104 p.
Filatov S. Duterte’s arrest and its implications for the Philippines, the US and China. The Worldwide Affairs. March 15, 2025. Obtainable at: https://interaffairs.ru/information/present/50683 (accessed: 18.03.2025). (In Russian)
Gevorgyan, Kirill. 2012. “Unilateral Sanctions” and Worldwide Legislation. The Worldwide Affairs 8. Obtainable at: https://interaffairs.ru/jauthor/materials/720 (accessed: 06.03.2025). (In Russian)
Worldwide Legislation and the Combat towards Crime. Assortment of Paperwork. 1997. Zmeevskii A. V., Kolosov Yu. M. (introd.). Moscow. (In Russian)
Ispolinov, Aleksey S. 2023. Attempting on the Ring of Omnipotence: The Worldwide Felony Courtroom and the Immunities of Heads of State. Rossiiskii iuridicheskii zhurnal 2: 37–58. (In Russian)
Ispolinov, Aleksey S. 2024. Anatomy of a Disaster: Issues of Normative Legitimacy of an Worldwide Felony Courtroom. Zakon 2: 124–132. (In Russian)
Kjeldgaard-Pedersen, Astrid. 2020. Is the High quality of the ICC’s Authorized Reasoning an Impediment to Its Means to Deter Worldwide Crimes? iCourts: iCourts Working Paper Collection 191. 29 p. Obtainable at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Supply.cfm/SSRN_ID3570447_code2133408.pdf?abstractid=3570447&mirid=1&kind=2 (accessed: 05.02.2025).
Klabbers, Jan. 2017. Worldwide Legislation. 2nd ed. Cambridge, Cambridge College Press. 370 p.
Kritskiy, Kirill V. 2016. The phrases “worldwide sanctions” and “unilateral restrictive measures”. Moskovskii zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava 2: 204–213. (In Russian)
Kritskiy, Kirill V. 2019. Sanctions and unilateral restrictive measures in fashionable worldwide regulation. PhD in Legislation thesis. Moscow. 186 p. (In Russian)
Ning Yu. How US evades duty for conflict crimes in Afghanistan. World Occasions. Obtainable at: https://www.globaltimes.cn/web page/202109/1235240.shtml (accessed: 14.02.2025).
Pyatibratov, Ivan S. 2020. Sanctions and unilateral restrictive measures: the issue of delineation of phrases and identification of phenomena. Gumanitarnye nauki. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta 10 (6): 61–65. (In Russian)
Ryzhova, Mariia V. 2006. Financial sanctions in fashionable worldwide regulation. PhD in Legislation thesis summary. Kazan. 25 p. (In Russian)
Schabas, William A. 2020. Chapter 1: The dynamics of the Rome Convention. The Elgar Companion to the Worldwide Felony Courtroom. de Guzman M., Oosterveld V. (eds). Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing Restricted; Northampton, Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.: 3–19.
Shaw, Malcolm N. 2008. Worldwide Legislation. sixth ed. New York, Cambridge College Press. CLXVI. 1542 p.
Smith T. The ICC caught in clan rivalry in Philippines. Justiceinfo.web. January 27, 2025. Obtainable at: https://www.justiceinfo.web/en/140756-icc-caught-clan-rivalry-philippines.html (accessed: 18.03.2025).
The Previous, Current and Way forward for the Worldwide Felony Courtroom. 2021. Heinze A., Dittrich V. E. (eds). Brussels, Torkel Opsahl Educational EPublisher. XXI, 783 p.
Tladi, Dire. 2013. The ICC Selections on Chad and Malawi: On Cooperation, Immunities, and Article 98. Journal of Worldwide Felony Justice 11 (1): 199–221.
van Alebeek, Rosanne. 2008. The Immunity of States and Their Officers in Worldwide Felony Legislation and Worldwide Human Rights Legislation. Oxford; New York, Oxford College Press. XXXVIII, 449 p.
Article by Deputy Chairman of the Safety Council of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev for the St. Petersburg State College journal “Pravovedenie”
