On July 1, the city of Lisichansk was filled with smoke.
Dialogue Ukraine "Legal War" Commander: Russia will face the "Tokyo Trial" in the 21st century.
Text/Feng Xu
On July 3, local time, Russian Defense Minister Shao Igu reported to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the Russian army had "liberated" the Lugansk region and fully controlled the last city in the region, Lisichansk, and its surrounding residential areas.
On the same day, Yuri Sack, adviser to the Ukrainian Defense Minister, stated that Lischichansk was not completely controlled by the Russian army, and the battle for Donbass would not end. But Ukrainian President Zelensky admitted that the Ukrainian army had withdrawn from Lischichansk, but he vowed to regain control of the area with the help of Western long-range weapons.
The war between Russia and Ukraine has lasted for more than four months. In addition to military confrontations and exchanges of fire, this "comprehensive war" also includes public opinion war, economic war , energy war, diplomatic war, etc. In contrast, the legal battle through international law confrontation has received less attention, except for the provisional measures order issued by the International Court of Justice on March 16 requiring the Russian army to cease military operations, and the intensive accusations from both Russia and Ukraine after the "Bucha Incident" Aside from war crimes committed by the other side, the legal battle between the two sides rarely makes international media headlines.
However, in order to occupy the moral high ground and gain support from the international community, Russia and Ukraine attach far greater importance to the legal war than the outside world imagined. . Before the special military operation on February 24, Russia first accused Ukraine of attacking Donbass committed genocide in the region and subsequently “recognized” the two breakaway regimes in Donbas as independent states. Kortunov, Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council, regarded by the West as "Putin's think tank", once said that the most critical significance of the "recognition" step is that only by "recognizing" the two "republics" can Russia be able to reconcile with They sign bilateral cooperation treaties, thus legally launching special military operations.
Russia "takes the law first," while Ukraine counterattacks with legal means as soon as possible. On February 26, two days after the Russian army began its operation, the Ukrainian government formally submitted a lawsuit against Russia to the United Nations International Court of Justice. Previously, Ukraine sued Russia at the International Court of Justice in 2017 over issues related to the Donbas War and Crimean independence, but three years had passed since the conflict occurred. In contrast, both sides moved quickly in the legal battle this time, which is clear at a glance . The International Court of Justice issued interim measures calling for a ceasefire between the two sides within 20 days of accepting the lawsuit, which was also "the fastest in history."
The top Ukrainian commander in this "battle" is Anton Alexandro Korinevich, the head of the Ukrainian government delegation to the International Court of Justice. In a recent conversation with the author, he revealed that in fact, on the 21st, when Moscow "recognized" the independence of Donbass, his team had decided to take legal measures to fight back, and received support from superiors.
Korinevich, who is only 36 years old, was originally a professor at the School of Law and School of International Relations at Kyiv Shevchenko University, the top-ranked university in Ukraine. In 2019, he was appointed by the new President Zelensky as the President of Ukraine in Kerry. Special Envoy to Miya and member of the newly established Presidential Commission on Law Reform and Chairman of the Working Group. Today, he has a new title: ambassador-at-large for “international justice” at the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, presiding over the international legal battle in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Korinevich testified before the United Nations Security Council on behalf of the Ukrainian government (Picture: Permanent Mission of the Ukrainian Government to the United Nations)
Did Ukraine commit genocide in the Donbas region?
asked: Let’s start with the ICJ case (Ukraine v. Russia). We haven’t seen any new news about this case since March. Do you have any new information to share?
Kolinevich: Indeed, there has been no news about this case since March. But in March, in addition to issuing an order on provisional measures on the 16th, the court also issued an order on March 23 regarding the date for filing pleadings.According to the directive, Ukraine will submit pleadings and other documents before September 23, while Russia will submit it before March 23 next year. I guess we're not going to wait until September 23rd, so we're going to get this done as quickly as possible, and that's the main news about this case.
After we submit the pleadings, Russia has three months to submit preliminary objections to jurisdiction. let us wait and see. But we don't care if Russia files paperwork or shows up in court, we're going to do our job.
asked: Russia launched a "special military operation" against Ukraine on February 24, and Ukraine submitted this case to the International Court of Justice on the 26th. The last time Ukraine sued Russia at the International Court of Justice over the Donbass issue was in 2017, three years after the war in Donbass began. Why did Ukraine act so quickly this time?
Korinevich: First of all, has different technical complexity. This case only involves one legal issue, namely the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention), while the 2017 case involves two legal issues, namely the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and the and "International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination " respectively correspond to the Donbass issue and the Crimea issue. I can't say which legal issue was more "difficult," but the last case did mean more preparation time.
The decision to prosecute was made by the legal team of the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but the idea did not come about only on February 24. On February 21, Russia announced that it "recognized" the separatist forces of the two Ukrainian states as so-called "states." The team considered prosecution at that time. We realize that Russia's use of "genocide" as a reason for "recognition" is illegal and terrible. It will bring about a series of other problems and lead to further actions by Russia. So we quickly made the decision to go to the International Court of Justice to sue, and it was approved by (superiors).
On the other hand, we are sure that the courts understand the need to act quickly at this time. If you look at the time it took for the court to issue provisional measures, it was very quick in the case of the International Court of Justice. It only took 20 days. I hope that the court will continue to maintain this efficiency in the future.
asked: Why did you choose the Genocide Convention as the cause of action? There are different opinions that this case is more about the issue of state recognition and use of force under the Charter of the United Nations rather than the Genocide Convention.
Korinevich: As I just said, one of the reasons why Russia "recognized" the so-called "state" in the Donbas region and invaded Ukraine was to accuse Ukraine of "genocide." According to our understanding, Russia used "genocide" as an excuse to use force and claimed to save people from "genocide". We also know that the Genocide Convention has provisions regarding the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.
Therefore, our appeal to the court is: firstly, that Ukraine has not committed "genocide"; secondly, that if a country believes that other countries have committed so-called "genocide", that country does not have the right to use force to "combat genocide" Extinction".
Question: Regarding the provisional measures issued by the International Court of Justice in March requiring Russia to "cease military operations", Russia refused to implement it. Does Ukraine have any plans to take targeted actions?
Kolinevich: The provisional measures directive issued by the International Court of Justice on March 16 is valuable in itself. It has become an important international legal document regarding the situation between Russia and Ukraine. If Russia does not implement the ICJ's directive, it would mean that Russia has violated another international law. It is worth noting that after the directive was issued, we had a meeting with the President of the International Court of Justice on March 22, and the Russian Ambassador to the Netherlands attended the meeting. It may seem awkward and weird, but they show up anyway.
asked: Have you communicated with Russian people? For example, this ambassador, or the Russian judge of the International Court of Justice.
Korinevich: During the hearing in March, I did not have any dialogue with Russian judge and Vice President of the International Court of Justice Gevorgian. We did not communicate through any channels. I only saw him in March. Signed his own objections on the 16th. As for the Russian ambassador to the Netherlands, we only met but had no communication. At that meeting, I talked to the President of the International Court of Justice, and then he talked to the President of the International Court of Justice, and there was no communication between us. In fact, I have not had any contact with Russian people since February 24th.
asked: Since you mentioned the issue of genocide, I would like to know how you would respond to Russia’s accusations against Ukraine, that is, Moscow claims that Ukraine has carried out genocide, ethnic cleansing and other persecution against local Russian people in the Donbas region. .
Korinevich: Ukraine certainly did not commit any racial crimes. We will prove this in our pleadings, which will be filed with the court soon. In addition to this, if we look at the reports of various international human rights organizations and NGOs , we cannot find any claims that "genocide" took place on the territory of Ukraine. If this were to happen, there would always be reports mentioning it.
Q: But in fact, no human rights organizations or non-governmental organizations can enter the other side of the Donbas front. Are you worried that Russia will come up with some evidence?
Korinevich: I am not worried about . We know what Russia is capable of, we are ready, our briefs will be well argued, and we will show the court why "genocide" is entirely a "story" told by Russia .
html On July 4, a conference on rebuilding Ukraine was held in Switzerland. Zelensky delivered a video speech
Is it feasible to prosecute Russia for aggression?
Q: In addition to the International Court of Justice, there are other ongoing legal proceedings. I think people are most concerned about the investigation of the "Bucha Incident". Can you describe the current progress? Who will exercise jurisdiction, the domestic courts of Ukraine or the International Criminal Court ?
Korinevich: Both the Ukrainian court and the International Criminal Court will be involved in handling these cases. In general, as we do in other similar cases, Ukrainian domestic courts have primary judicial responsibility and deal with most crimes. At the same time, Ukraine has recognized the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court for related crimes during this period, so the International Criminal Court will also accept some cases , I think mainly some "big fish", some of the most important cases ...
Question: Are you saying that if the case is related to the "group crime" of the Russian government, or the defendant is in a place beyond the jurisdiction of Ukrainian courts, then Ukraine will submit the case to the International Criminal Court or other international institutions?
Kolinevich: I will answer this: We actively cooperate with the International Criminal Court, and also have a joint investigation team with Poland , Latvia , Estonia and other countries and the European Justice Organization, which is an international A special section of the Criminal Court, through which all information about cases we need to deal with is passed through this group, where the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, if interested, will find cases related to them.
As for your mention of "group crime", I think the cases we mentioned are the responsibility of the Russian government, but the main task of these investigations is to find the specific and exact people who committed the crimes: who were the perpetrators, who were the facilitators, Who are the policymakers behind the scenes?
Q: Kiev There are many voices calling on the international community to establish a special criminal court. I don’t quite understand: Ukraine has already cooperated with the International Criminal Court, why does it still need to seek to establish a special criminal court?
Korinevich: Our cooperation with the International Criminal Court is very effective and active. But specifically regarding the situation in Ukraine, as you know, according to the restrictions of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Court can only have jurisdiction over three types of crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The Court has no jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in relation to the situation in Ukraine because the provisions on the crime of aggression cannot take effect in this case.
In order for the International Criminal Court to have jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in the Ukrainian situation, Ukraine and Russia need to simultaneously recognize the court and the amendments to the Rome Statute on the crime of aggression; or the United Nations Security Council will directly transfer the situation to the International Criminal Court. But in the current situation, neither possibility exists.
So we say, We now need a special international tribunal for the war in Ukraine in order to bring the crimes of aggression against Ukraine to justice . I believe that Russia's aggression against Ukraine is the largest war on the European continent since 1945, and the international community must provide a corresponding legal response. In order to get an "answer", we need such a court, just like the Nuremberg Trial and Tokyo Trial after World War II, their jurisdiction includes "crimes against peace" (crime of aggression). Such a trial would also promote the development of international law.
Q: But how would you create such a court? All similar tribunals, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, were created by the United Nations Security Council, but it is clear that the Security Council will not pass similar resolutions now.
Kolinevich: You are right. If we seek a "classical" approach, we need the United Nations Security Council to pass a resolution to establish such a tribunal, or to pass a resolution authorizing the United Nations Secretary-General to reach an agreement with the parties concerned to establish a mixed system of special criminal tribunals. resolution. But we know very well that neither possibility exists.
understands this and we found several alternatives. The first is through the United Nations system, where the United Nations General Assembly authorizes the Secretary-General to reach an agreement with Ukraine on the establishment of a mixed system of special criminal tribunals. The second is to establish special criminal tribunals within the framework of regional international organizations, such as cooperation with and the European Union . The third is to take the lead of Ukraine and reach a multilateral agreement with countries that support the construction of the court, thereby adopting a treaty establishing a special criminal court. We are currently still discussing these options and considering the most effective one, which will be the basis for subsequent work.
Question: As you just described the crime of aggression, this is a very sensitive topic. For a long time, the US government has not wanted to define the crime of aggression as an international crime. (Note: For fear of being held accountable internationally for issues such as the Iraq War , the U.S. government has always opposed raising the crime of aggression to an international crime.) Do you think such a criminal tribunal can really be established? Do you have support from the United States?
Korinevich: I think it is feasible to prosecute Russia for the crime of aggression. It is possible for us to try Russia's political and military leaders for the crime of aggression. The only problem is that no international body has such jurisdiction. But whenever we establish such a tribunal, it will be a very valuable innovation and contribute to the development of international law. After this, all countries can discuss jurisdiction over the crime of aggression.
The ruins of Mariupol after the war
Did you expect that the war would happen on February 24?
Q: Before the war started, you were President Zelensky’s special representative in Crimea. But Crimea was already occupied by Russia at that time. What was your main job? Have you prepared for war in advance?
Korinevich: The delegation of the President of Ukraine to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea is a special state institution, which I have led since 2019 and serve as the permanent representative of the President. But as you said, the agency has only been able to work in exile since 2014. We cannot travel to Crimea and can only work in Kiev and Kherson .
Our Kiev office is mainly responsible for legal, political affairs and international cooperation affairs, while the Kherson office is mainly responsible for assisting Crimean citizens with border entry and exit issues, because Kherson Oblast is the only state with a border with Russian-occupied Crimea. neighboring areas. We have done a lot, including passing a lot of legislation in the Parliament to protect the people of Crimea. We also assist Crimean citizens who have crossed the border to settle in areas controlled by the Ukrainian government. But after February 24 of this year, we were left with only the Kiev office still working.
Our office has never worked with the Russian side. In fact, since our delegation moved to Kherson at the end of February 2014, we have never had any contact with the Russian authorities. Therefore, after the U.S. government warned in January this year that the Russian military might take military action, I did not participate in any contact with Russia. We were aware that a war might occur, so we confirmed the safety of documents and employees in advance, but we did not accurately anticipate that a war would occur on February 24.
I believe it is difficult for Europe and the United States to predict Russia's actions. Of course, I will wonder, If more weapons aid, economic aid, and more sanctions are in place before February 24, can war be avoided? But overall, it's a hard thing to predict.
Question: After the Russian military operation began, we saw that Ukraine distributed guns to civilians and called on the people in the occupied territories to fight against the Russian army. Does this involve violating the "principle of distinction" and other humanitarian law rules?
Korinevich: I am not a military person, and I am not sure if I really understand your question, but what I want to say is that the Ukrainian government has established a "territorial defense force" within the armed forces, and now on the Ukrainian side, Every individual fighting for Ukraine is officially integrated into specific units and divisions of the Ukrainian Army’s Territorial Defense Forces, and is therefore an official member of the Ukrainian Army. At this point, I think the Ukrainian government and military acted in compliance with international law, and I don't see any violations. If these personnel are captured by the Russian army, they should be entitled to treatment as prisoners of war under humanitarian law.
asked: After February 24, Ukraine and Russia held some working-level talks and high-level talks, but after April, all talks seemed to have stopped. When can the two sides restart peace talks?
Kolinevich: I am not a member of the negotiating team with Russia, but I believe that every war should and will end with an agreement; Every war will not last forever . Therefore, I personally hope that at some point in the future, what you are talking about will happen, the two sides will return to the negotiating table, and some kind of agreement can be signed.
[Copyright Statement] The copyright of this article belongs to [Earth Relativity]. Toutiao has obtained exclusive authorization for information network dissemination rights. No third party may reproduce it without authorization.
