A special court, which Western countries intend to create aggression against Ukraine for crimes, will not judge Vladimir Putin, so as not to default, while he continues to remain the President of the Russian Federation.
The same provision will be applied to the Russian prime minister Mikhail Mishustin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, reports Two European employees with knowledge of the process and talked with Euronews.
The accusation of these high employees will be allowed only if the accused will be physically present in the room, which is unlikely, since Russia does not recognize the invasion of Ukraine as a criminal and firmly opposed cooperation with the West.
As an alternative, a default test can be conducted after Putin leaves the office.
Conditions are determined in the project, respectively, which will be a legal basis for creating a special court in the Council of Europe, the organization of the protection of human rights based in Strasbourg. The organization is not part of the European Union (EU), but the block is closely related to this process.
Technical work is over At the end of March, During the meeting of the so -called “Central Group” in Strasbourg, which created three different draft documents: a bilateral agreement between Ukraine and the Council of Europe, the statute of a special court and an agreement that determines the leadership of a special court.
The signature is scheduled for May 9 in Kyiv, which coincides with the Day of Europe, although the exact calendar depends on political support.
According to the EU employee, restrictions on the decision on default are considered as a “obligation” between countries. After several months of discussion, the location is currently a “closed business”, without any chance of being changed before the presentation.
“In the end, this is politics and negotiations,” the official said.
As soon as Kyiv signed the agreement, the text will be presented at the vote at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which unites representatives of 46 countries that are part of the organization. Russia was excluded shortly after the outbreak of war.
For ratification of an agreement, which is practically guaranteed due to the wide support of the initiative between member states, most of the two-thirds will be required.
Some countries that have accepted Russian favorable positions, such as Hungary and Serbia, can refrain or vote, although individual vetos are not used.
It is expected that democratic countries will be outside the continent, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Japan, added to this initiative, expanding their legitimacy.
It is unlikely that the United States that began the approach to Russia participate. During the government, Joe Biden supported the search for justice in Ukraine, but after the inauguration of Donald Trump, the orientation changed.
The United States was not present at the meeting of the central group at the end of March. It is not known how Trump’s impulse to a peace agreement can affect the trial.
“More than 38 states expressed their political support to the creation of a court, as well as the European Union”,The representative of the Council of Europe in Euro said.
After the agreements are ratified, the court is expected to be with the headquarters in the Hague, a city with a long tradition in international law, which is already supported by the International Court (TIJ) and the International Criminal Court (TPI).
ICT separately issued a warrant to capture Putin and one of his deputies to illegally transfer Ukrainian children to Russia.
Demand for justice
The idea of creating a court ad hoc Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was protected by a crime of aggression to ensure that Putin’s large invasion for more than three years to provide responsibility.
Unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, who apply to persons who commit atrocities, such as military officers and mercenaries, Crime of aggression This is a crime of leadership, which is aimed at a person responsible for monitoring the state of the aggressor.
Aggression may consist of invasion, occupation, annexation, port blocking or any other attack, including the use of weapons to one state against another.
According to the Mus, the crime of aggression is associated with “planning, preparation, beginning or execution by a person in which it is able to exercise effective control or direct the political or military operations of the state, an act of aggression, which, by nature, gravity and scale
This makes Putin the most likely defendant in the future.
Although the Mus established jurisdiction about the crimes of aggression in accordance with SO Amendments to CampalThis applies only to countries and citizens of countries that are part of the Roman Statute. Russia, like the USA and China, did not sign.
That is why the Western allies studied the opportunity to create a special court with authority to judge in the specific case of the Russian war against Ukraine.
“There were no war crimes without a crime,” said the high representative of Kaja Callas in early FebruaryField
“Therefore, it is extremely important that there is also responsibility for the crime of aggression. None of Russia and none of Russia was inviolable. ”
“It is also very important to send a sign that crimes that are not punished, only encourage new aggression,” he added, emphasizing that the court must be created ”before the end of the war.”
Since the beginning of the conversation, the possibility of default testing was an important factor.
From the Kremlin’s refusal to deliver their high employees, the defenders of this model believe that this will be the only viable way to ensure a minimum of justice. Critics, however, argue that the trial of default will be considered as an illegal scam.
“I think that this court has more than a symbolic meaning. I think this is legal, I think it is political. I think that it is important to be established and that the crime of aggression is shifted, ”the EU official said.
“I am personally convinced that this will not be a fake institution in the Hague without influence, but it will serve in the coming years, and that the history will judge this court very positively.”
Immunity, which heads of state, government heads and foreign ministers are considered an additional obstacle to criminal actions.
“Nevertheless, international law is developing, and personal immunity is not a letter for impunity,” said a representative of the Council of Europe.
“The Council of Europe believes that the formula found for a special court on this issue will be sufficient to ensure responsibility and combat impunity.”
The last time that the crime of the attack was taken to court during litigation in Nuremberg, which was carried out after the Second World War, when the prosecution was known as “crimes against the world.”