Saturday

28th Jan 2023

Legal scholars: Prosecuting Putin 'legally problematic'

  • Distruction of civilian targets in Ukraine. While war crimes can be tried by the International Criminal Court, the crime of aggression is more difficult (Photo: Alde)
Listen to article

Legal scholars argued on Monday (28 November) that, without the backing of the UN general assembly, it would be legally challenging to set up a tribunal to prosecute Russian aggression against Ukraine.

While the issue of setting up a tribunal will be discussed by EU member states in the next weeks (and possibly by EU leaders in mid-December,) with the EU Commission drawing up different options, legal scholars warn that "current law is not sufficient" to try Russia for the crime of aggression, from which all other war crimes stem.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction to investigates genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity with the consent of the state on whose territory they were allegedly committed.

However, the court cannot investigate or adjudicate the "crime of crimes", the crime of aggression, unless both aggressor and aggressed states consent.

"All the options are legally problematic, because there are no special tribunals competent to try a crime of aggression," Olivier Corten, professor of international law at the ULB university told MEPs on the subcommittee for human rights in the European Parliament.

Carl Bildt, the co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) and former prime minister of Sweden said there is an "urgent need" to prosecute the war crimes that have been committed as part of Russia's aggression against Ukraine.

He argued it was "imperative to set up a tribunal on the specific crime of aggression", which is "the supreme crime under international law".

He also said that going through the ICC is impossible currently, and suggested that other ways for prosecution could include an agreement between the EU and Ukraine or involve the Council of Europe. Another option would have the UN general assembly ask the secretary general to set up a tribunal.

What makes the "crime of aggression" special, is that it is a so-called leadership crime that can only be committed by those in power, rather than those who carry it out. It means it can target Russian president Vladimir Putin, rather than those who executed his orders.

Vaios Koutroulis, another professor of international law at ULB, warned that immunity of state officials applies in the case of crime of aggression, but an international tribunal could circumvent this problem.

He said to obligate Russia to cooperate, the tribunal needs to be embedded in a binding decision by the UN, which is unlikely with Russia in the security council.

Koutroulis said that the "legitimacy of a special tribunal created only by states would be fragile and that it would be important to include a universal international organisation in the creation of the tribunal".

He recommended having a UN general assembly resolution — as the security council would not agree because of a Russian veto — and either create a tribunal itself, or defer the issue to the ICC.

However, this would be an extension of the general assembly's power, which would be unacceptable for EU countries, a senior official from the bloc's foreign service, Frank Hoffmeister, warned.

He argued the general assembly has already said Russia's invasion is an aggression.

He said Ukraine is to propose a UN general resolution to ask the general secretary to negotiate with Ukraine the establishment of such a tribunal.

Hoffmeister argued that an interim prosecution office, which would look at the preparation of indictment, without taking a decision how the tribunal would look like, should be set up.

Both Corten and Koutroulis recommended that eventually the ICC's statute needs to be amended.

New political push?

Centre-right Lithuanian MEP Andrius Kubilius proposed to have another resolution adopted by the European Parliament to emphasise the need to hold perpetrators accountable.

In May, MEPs already adopted a resolution calling for the EU to support setting up a special international tribunal to punish the crime of aggression committed against Ukraine, for which the ICC has no jurisdiction, and hold Russian political leaders and military commanders and their allies to account.

Ukraine files cases against 45 suspected war criminals

Ukraine has filed court papers against 45 suspected war criminals out of whom 10 have been already convicted for crimes committed since the Russian invasion began in late February, said Ukraine's prosecutor general

Opinion

How to apply the Nuremberg model for Russian war crimes

A Special Tribunal on Russian war crimes in Ukraine must be convened, because no permanent or existing international judicial institution is endowed with jurisdiction over Russian high-ranking officials, writes the head of the Ukraine delegation to the Council of Europe.

Rights group documents forcible-transfer war crimes in Ukraine

A new Human Rights Watch report documents how Russia has forcibly transferred Ukrainian citizens from their homes to Russia and Russian-controlled areas of eastern Ukraine, a war crime in breach of international law, in a so-called "filtration" process.

Opinion

Why the new ECHR Ukraine-Russia ruling matters

The ECHR ruled that Russia was in "effective control" of separatist regions of Eastern Ukraine from 11 May 2014. In doing so, the court has formally acknowledged the inter-state character of the conflict and Russia's culpability for human rights abuses.

Latest News

  1. Pressure mounts on EU to coordinate visas for Russian rights-defenders
  2. Dutch set to agree to US-led chip controls to China
  3. No record of Latvian MEP's 'official' Azerbaijan trip
  4. Why the new ECHR Ukraine-Russia ruling matters
  5. Europe continues to finance Russia's war in Ukraine with lucrative fossil fuel trades
  6. Official: EU parliament's weak internal rule-making body leads to 'culture of impunity'
  7. Red tape border logjam for EU's 1.3m 'frontier workers'
  8. Greece's spy scandal must shake us out of complacency

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual & Reproductive Rights (EPF)Launch of the EPF Contraception Policy Atlas Europe 2023. 8th February. Register now.
  2. Europan Patent OfficeHydrogen patents for a clean energy future: A global trend analysis of innovation along hydrogen value chains
  3. Forum EuropeConnecting the World from the Skies calls for global cooperation in NTN rollout
  4. EFBWWCouncil issues disappointing position ignoring the threats posed by asbestos
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersLarge Nordic youth delegation at COP15 biodiversity summit in Montreal
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersCOP27: Food systems transformation for climate action

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersThe Nordic Region and the African Union urge the COP27 to talk about gender equality
  2. Friedrich Naumann Foundation European DialogueGender x Geopolitics: Shaping an Inclusive Foreign Security Policy for Europe
  3. Obama FoundationThe Obama Foundation Opens Applications for its Leaders Program in Europe
  4. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBA lot more needs to be done to better protect construction workers from asbestos
  5. European Committee of the RegionsRe-Watch EURegions Week 2022
  6. UNESDA - Soft Drinks EuropeCall for EU action – SMEs in the beverage industry call for fairer access to recycled material

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us