Ukraine has filed a lawsuit in the international court of justice in January of this year. The lawsuit was filed under the International Convention for the suppression of the financing of terrorism and the International Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.

It said that the Russian Federation violated the international Convention for the suppression of the financing of terrorism by providing arms and other assistance to the insurgents. Kiev also accused Russia of violating the Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination, in particular communities of ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars.

At the same time, the Russian foreign Ministry said it was “politicized prosecution” and they are beyond the jurisdiction of the court .

In addition, Ukraine has appealed to the international court of justice with a request to impose interim measures aimed at preventing the continuation of human rights violations by the Russian Federation during the trial on the merits.

Today the court announced an interim decision on the lawsuit. First, the court found that jurisdiction “prima facie” for consideration on the claim of Ukraine against Russia.

However, after that the Chairman of the court, Ronnie Abraham said that the court of justice has recognized insufficient evidence of Ukraine on financing Russia terrorism. Thus, the international court of justice denied the provisional measures against Russia under the Convention for the suppression of the financing of terrorism.

“The court came to the conclusion that the conditions necessary to define additional measures in respect of the rights to break in Ukraine on the basis of the Convention for the suppression of the financing of terrorism do not meet the requirements”, – declared the judge.

At the same time, the court granted the request on interim measures in the claim against Russia under the Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination. Judge Abraham said that the provisional measures at the suit will be formulated in a different form than that proposed by Ukraine.

The decision States that until a final decision in the case of the Russian Federation shall refrain from infringing on the rights of the Crimean Tatars, to give them the opportunity to keep their representative institutions, including the Majlis, and to provide access to education in the Ukrainian language in Crimea.

The court also recalled that Ukraine and Russia signed the “Minsk agreement” and they should make individual and joint efforts to ensure the full implementation of them to achieve a peaceful settlement of the conflict in the Donbass.

Now about the consequences. The decision of the International court of justice will have mostly symbolic, not practical value. Note that article 94 of the UN Charter provides that decisions of the court are binding. But the second paragraph of the same article stipulates that if a party does not comply with the decision, then it interferes with the UN Security Council and takes steps to ensure that she still began to run. Russia in the security Council has veto power. They at one time have used the United States.

In 1986, on the claim of Nicaragua against the United States, the judge ruled that the military operations of Washington in the territory of Nicaragua was aggression and was contrary to the principle of international law renouncing the use of force against other States. No consequences for the U.S. this decision was not, as the draft of the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council was doomed to failure because of the veto power of Washington. Moreover, after the decision in favor of Nicaragua, which included in particular the payment of compensation, the United States withdrew from the jurisdiction of the International court of justice. If Russia lost, it could take a cue from Washington.

The decision of the court of justice is only the imposition of qualified opinions, recommendations, which are based on international law. “The decision of the court of justice will be in the nature of high-level recommendations, with some international authority. Will Russia implement these recommendations is a matter solely for the sovereign will of Russia”, – said the expert on international Affairs of the Ukrainian Institute of policy analysis and management Mr Will.

But the court ordered Ukraine to carry out some decision. This, of course, about the Minsk agreement. If Kiev, according to Russia, they will not run, the Kremlin may apply to have Salvez UN to oblige Kiev to do it. Ukraine, though a member of the security Council now, but the veto has not. Therefore, in addition to image blow to Ukraine today’s court decision could have legal consequences. In addition, if the final decision of the International court of justice does not recognize Russia as a sponsor of terrorism, it is unlikely that any other court of lower rank would consider such accusations.

Ukraine is preparing a lawsuit to the Russian President Vladimir Putin and his inner circle to the international criminal court (ICC), which is also located in the Hague. He established to investigate genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. But last year, Putin said that his country has not ratified the Rome Statute on which the ICC operates, and hence to accept the decision of this court of the Russian Federation will not. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that Ukraine has still not ratified the document.

Ukraine has also sent five cases to the European court of human rights (ECHR). They relate to the occupation of the Donbass, human rights violations in the Crimea and ban the Mejlis. The latter claim concerns the theft by Russian border guards Ukrainian children (they missed the bus with the children of Donbass to the alleged recovery in Russia). The constitutional court of the Russian Federation in 2016 held that the decisions of the ECtHR the last word for him, and therefore, Russia can not perform.

I 112.ua in your Telegram
and Facebook.
Quickly and succinctly about the most important.