Ukraine v. Russian Federation (2017)

Last updated

Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation)
Seal of the International Court of Justice.png
Court International Court of Justice
Citation(s)General List No. 166
Court membership
Judges sitting Abdulqawi Yusuf (President)
Xue Hanqin (Vice-President)
Ronny Abraham
Mohamed Bennouna
Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade
Joan Donoghue
Giorgio Gaja
Julia Sebutinde
Dalveer Bhandari
Patrick Lipton Robinson
James Crawford
Nawaf Salam
Yuji Iwasawa
Peter Tomka
Fausto Pocar (ad hoc)
Leonid Skotnikov (ad hoc)

The case Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation) is a case in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). On January 16, 2017, a representative of Ukraine filed a lawsuit at the International Court of Justice to hold the Russian Federation liable for committing acts of "terrorism" and discrimination against Ukraine. [1] The lawsuit alleges violations of the Terrorist Financing Convention and International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Contents

Judgment

On March 6, 2017, hearings began on Ukraine's application for preventive measures, which lasted until March 9. [2] Preventive measures will allow the Court to prevent the deterioration of the situation and to protect the civilian population for the length of time necessary to hear the case. Consideration of the merits of the claim will continue regardless of the Court's ruling on the request for the application of preventive measures.

On April 19, 2017, a precautionary decision was announced. The International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled that Russia should refrain from imposing restrictions on the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People and allow it to resume its activities. [3] [4] The ICJ denied Ukraine approval of provisional measures against Russia on prohibition of terrorist financing. [5]

On November 8, 2019, the court found that it has jurisdiction to hear the case on the basis of anti-terrorism and anti-discrimination treaties over Russia's alleged support for separatists in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. Also the ICJ rejected Moscow's call on preliminary objections. [6] [7]

Verdict

Regarding violations of the Terrorist Financing Convention, the court ruled that only financial funding is a subject of the Convention, therefore supply of weapons and ammunition is left out of the case entirely. The court concluded that Ukraine did not provide enough evidence that Russia knew that its financial funds would be used with the intention of committing acts of terrorism; therefore Russia was not obliged to satisfy Ukraine's demands of extradition of people who were accused of financing terrorists on the territory of Ukraine, nor was it obliged to assist Ukraine in investigating alleged funding of terrorism. Nevertheless, Russia was still obliged to conduct an investigation of its own of crimes related to the financing of terrorism by people who were on the territory of Russian Federation; it failed to do so, despite the fact that Ukraine repeatedly requested it, therefore violating the Convention.

Regarding violations of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the court ruled that enough evidence was provided that steep and systematic decline in providing education in Ukrainian language in Crimea was artificially enforced by the Russian Federation with intent to harm Ukrainian ethnicity in the region, dismissing Russia's accusations that alleged lack of interest was the reason behind the decline, confirming the existence of a pattern of ethnic discrimination and thus finding Russia guilty of violating the Convention. At the same time, the court deemed Ukraine failed to provide enough evidence that the ban of the Mejlis, persecution of its members and other Crimean Tatar and Ukrainian activists and repeated ban to conduct a peaceful assembly were ethnically motivated, though the court recognized that Ukraine could not provide additional evidence because it does not have access to Crimea, and therefore refers to the reports of international organizations. Based on those, it concludes that their political activity and views were the reason behind their persecution rather than their ethnicity, therefore it does not violate the Convention. At the same time the court acknowledged that its verdict from 2017, in which it ordered Russia to lift the ban of Mejlis, has been left unfulfilled. [8]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Court of Justice</span> Primary judicial organ of the United Nations

The International Court of Justice, also called the World Court, is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between nations, and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues. It is one of the six organs of the United Nations (UN), and is located in The Hague, Netherlands.

The LaGrand case was a legal action heard before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which concerned the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. In the case, the ICJ ruled that its own temporary court orders were legally binding and that the rights contained in the convention could not be denied by the application of domestic legal procedures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Court of Human Rights</span> Supranational court established by the Council of Europe

The European Court of Human Rights, also known as the Strasbourg Court, is an international court of the Council of Europe which interprets the European Convention on Human Rights. The court hears applications alleging that a contracting state has breached one or more of the human rights enumerated in the convention or its optional protocols to which a member state is a party. The court is based in Strasbourg, France.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Counterterrorism</span> Activity to defend against or prevent terrorist actions

Counterterrorism, also known as anti-terrorism, relates to the practices, military tactics, techniques, and strategies that governments, law enforcement, businesses, and intelligence agencies use to combat or eliminate terrorism.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime, and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly. The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 152 state parties as of 2022.

In legal terminology, erga omnes rights or obligations are owed toward all. Erga omnes is a Latin phrase which means "towards all" or "towards everyone". For instance, a property right is an erga omnes entitlement and therefore enforceable against anybody infringing that right.

Anti-terrorism legislation are laws with the purpose of fighting terrorism. They usually, if not always, follow specific bombings or assassinations. Anti-terrorism legislation usually includes specific amendments allowing the state to bypass its own legislation when fighting terrorism-related crimes, under alleged grounds of necessity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People</span> Crimean Tatar rights organisation

The Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People is the single highest executive-representative body of the Crimean Tatars in period between sessions of the Qurultay of the Crimean Tatar People. The Mejlis is a member institution of the Platform of European Memory and Conscience.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Council of Ministers of Crimea</span> Former subnational governmental body in Ukraine

The Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, briefly SovMin, is the executive branch of government of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, a republic within southern Ukraine that is currently suspended due to Russian occupation of the Crimean Peninsula since February 27, 2014. The Council of Ministers derived its authority from the Constitution and laws of Ukraine and normative acts of the Verkhovna Rada of Crimea which bring them into its competency.

The Terrorist Financing Convention is a 1999 United Nations treaty designed to criminalize acts of financing acts of terrorism. The convention also seeks to promote police and judicial co-operation to prevent, investigate and punish the financing of such acts. As of October 2018, the treaty has been ratified by 188 states; in terms of universality, it is therefore one of the most successful anti-terrorism treaties in history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination</span> 1969 United Nations human rights instrument

The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) is a United Nations convention. A third-generation human rights instrument, the Convention commits its members to the elimination of racial discrimination and the promotion of understanding among all races. The Convention also requires its parties to criminalize hate speech and criminalize membership in racist organizations.

The Crimean status referendum of 2014 was a disputed referendum on March 16, 2014, concerning the status of Crimea that was conducted in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol after Russian forces seized control of Crimea.

<i>Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity</i> (Iran v. United States)

Alleged Violations of the 1955 Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations, and Consular Rights is the formal name of a case in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Iran filed a lawsuit with the Hague-based ICJ against the United States, on 16 July 2018, mainly based on the 1955 Treaty of Amity signed between the two sides on 15 August 1955 and entered into force in 1957, well before the Islamic revolution of Iran. Iranian officials alleged that U.S. re-imposition of the nuclear sanctions was a violation of the treaty. Iran also filed a request for provisional measures. In response, the United States asserted that the lawsuit as "baseless" and vowed to oppose it. Almost a month later, the ICJ heard the provisional measures request. On 3 October 2018, the International Court of Justice issued a provisional measures order requiring the United States "to lift sanctions linked to humanitarian goods and civil aviation imposed against Iran."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rohingya genocide case</span> 2019 International Court of Justice case

The Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide , commonly referred to as the Rohingya genocide case, is a case which is currently being heard by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The case was brought forward by the Republic of The Gambia, on behalf of 57 members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in 2019.

<i>Republic of Armenia v. Republic of Azerbaijan</i>

Application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination is a court case at The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. The public hearings were held on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by the Republic of Armenia in the case concerning application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination on Thursday 14 and Friday 15 October 2021, at The Hague Peace Palace - the seat of the Court.

<i>Ukraine v. Russian Federation</i> (2022) International Court of Justice case

Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is a case brought before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It was submitted by Ukraine on 26 February 2022 against Russia following the latter's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which Russia sought to justify in part by claims that Ukraine was engaged in acts of genocide within the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts. Ukraine said that these claims gave rise to a dispute under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and based its application on the ICJ's jurisdiction to resolve disputes involving the convention. On 16 March 2022, the court ruled that Russia must "immediately suspend the military operations" in Ukraine, while waiting for the final decision on the case.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine violated international law. The invasion has also been called a crime of aggression under international criminal law, and under some countries' domestic criminal codes – including those of Ukraine and Russia – although procedural obstacles exist to prosecutions under these laws.

During the build-up to its invasion of Ukraine, Russia falsely accused Ukraine of genocide against Russian speakers in the Donbas region. Ukraine fought a war against Russian proxy forces in the Donbas War from 2014 to 2022. Russia's president Vladimir Putin used this claim of genocide to justify the invasion of Ukraine. There is no evidence to support the allegation and it has been widely rejected.

<i>Canada and the Netherlands v. Syrian Arab Republic</i> Ongoing International Court of Justice case

On June 8, 2023, The governments of Canada and The Netherlands brought a case against Syria before the International Court of Justice accusing the Syrian Government of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment of its own population beginning at least in 2011 and failing to fulfill its obligations regarding the prohibition against torture violating the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

<i>South Africa v. Israel</i> (Genocide Convention) 2023 case at International Court of Justice

The proceedings instituted by South Africa against Israel on 29 December 2023 before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are officially referred to as Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip .

References

  1. "EJIL: Talk! – Ukraine Takes Russia to the International Court of Justice: Will It Work?". EJIL: Talk! . 26 January 2017. Archived from the original on 2019-11-08. Retrieved 2019-11-08.
  2. Oliphant, Roland (2017-03-06). "Ukraine sues Russia in International Court of Justice for 'financing terrorism'". The Telegraph. ISSN   0307-1235. Archived from the original on 2019-11-08. Retrieved 2019-11-08.
  3. van den Berg, Stephanie (3 June 2019). "Russia rebuffs Ukraine's case over rebel support at U.N. court". Reuters . Archived from the original on 2019-11-08. Retrieved 2019-11-08.
  4. Request for the indication of provisional measures Archived 2018-05-16 at the Wayback Machine ICJ Summary
  5. "ICJ Says It Won't Impose Measures Against Russia In Case Brought By Kyiv". Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. 19 April 2017. Archived from the original on 2019-11-08. Retrieved 2019-11-08.
  6. "U.N. top court rejects Moscow's call to block Ukraine vs Russia case". Reuters. 2019-11-08. Archived from the original on 2019-11-08. Retrieved 2019-11-08.
  7. "UN International Court of Justice recognizes Ukraine's suit against Russia as one under its jurisdiction". Interfax-Ukraine. Archived from the original on 2019-11-08. Retrieved 2019-11-08.
  8. "Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation)" (PDF). International Court of Justice. 2024-01-31. Retrieved 2024-02-11.