How to condemn Putin for heavy crimes in Ukraine - three possible scenarios

Executives and organizers are responsible for serious criminal offenses. This is a very obvious opinion. However, it often happens that it is much easier to prove the guilty of the contractor than the guilty of the organizer.

Now Ukrainians care the logical question: how and when the Putin will be closed. Unfortunately, no criminal proceedings in Ukraine can be initiated against it. In international customary law there is a concept of immunity for high officials before national courts.

Therefore, we are looking for other possible scenarios in historical analogies. And there are three main scenarios.

Through the International Criminal Tribunal (ICC)

The International Criminal Court is a relatively new institution operating since 2002. In its jurisdiction, international crimes are: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression crimes.

The ICC acts according to the Roman statute. His members are 123 countries. Neither Ukraine nor Russia have ratified the Roman statute. However, 2014-2015. Ukraine acknowledged the competence of the IKS over the heavy crimes on Majdan, Crimea and Donbas.

In relation to current events, 41 Member States have already addressed the MKS chief prosecutor Khan Khan to explore the situation in Ukraine.

Historical analogy is the case of ICC Omara Al-Bashira, President Sudan (1993-2019).

Omar Al-Bashir came to power by a military strike. During 26 years of government, Sudan experienced civil war, ethnic and religious conflicts, disintegration and genocide.

In 2009, the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for the arrest of Omar Al-Bashir. This was the first time in the history that the arrest warrant was invaded for the current head of the state. The accusations were in conflict in Darfur and are classified as crimes against humanity and war crimes.

And in 2010, the ICC issued another warrant for the arrest of Al-Bashira. This time, they accused him of organizing and conducting genocide over ethnic masses of masalite.

The basis for the conflict in Darfur was the discovery of oil sites. The interests of the autochthonous population did not take care of the exploitation of this energy source.

This aggravated the interethnic conflict between the black sudans and the Arabic sudans.

In essence, black sudans were forced to leave their homes for massacre and destruction of the settlement. The official government policy has led to a humanitarian disaster. About 400,000 people were killed in conflict, and more than two million were left without a roof over the head.

Despite ICC, Omara Al-Bashira received friendly countries, including Russia and Belarus.

At the end of 2018 and early 2019, mass demonstrations against the Economic Policy of Al-Bashir's regime were held in Sudan. As a result, in April 2019, Al-Bashir was overthrown by a military strike.

It was first placed in home detention, and later closed under the accusation of corruption, the murder of 37 demonstrators and illegally taking over the government. The decision has now been made that Omar Al-Bashir is transferred to the ICC's arrest order, where he will be judged by war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

With regard to the MKS appealed by a large number of states due to invasion on Ukraine, such a scenario looks credible. It is essential that there is a precedent for the announcement of a warrant for the current president.

The Roman Statute of the IKS prescribes that the personal immunity of high officials does not protect them from the court's responsibility. This is important because it is simply impossible to launch a criminal procedure against Putin and issue an arrest warrant in Ukraine. After all, even if it ceases to perform the function of the president, according to international customary law, there will be a functional immunity, which releases responsibilities for the actions he committed as president.

However, it is important to understand that the issuance of arrest warrants and just arresting different things. The arrest warrant isolating, but does not mean

automatic custody. Therefore, socio-political changes in Russia itself are important for deployment.

In addition, it should be noted that according to the Roman Statute, citizens of non-member states may be prosecuted for all three international crimes except for one - the crime of aggression.

But since Russia did not ratify the Roman statute, it is impossible to bring Vladimir Putin's justice for the attack on Ukraine.

Establishing an International Ad Hoc Tribunal

One of the possible scenarios for the criminal prosecution of the highest Russian political leadership is the creation of an ad hoc international court (Special Court).

Ad hoc Tribunals are international courts established by concluding a contract for investigations of individual cases.

Ad Hoc courts usually replaced the absence of an international criminal court, and their competence is limited to exploration of crimes during concrete conflicts. Historically, they were created either by the UN Security Council resolution or the winner state decision.

An example of such a mechanism is the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for Processing responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the former Yugoslavia since 1991.

This tribunal is unique in modern history. He became the first international criminal court who founded the United Nations. And for a relatively short time, as a reaction to tragic events that shook the whole world.

The Bosnian conflict marked fierce struggles, ethnic cleansing and mass murder, including ethnic and religious non-regular forces and regular troops from Croatia and Serbia.

More than 8,000 Muslims killed Serbian soldiers in Srebrenica, which was later confirmed as an act of genocide still denying Russia and Serbia. At least 100,000 people were killed in the war.

During the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, 161 persons were charged, of which 90 were convicted. The process lasted more than 20 years.

Among the accused, former President of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic and former Vice President of Serbia Vojislav Seselj, the first President of Republika

Srpska in Bosnia and Herzegovina Radovan Karadzic and General Ratko Mladic, who were found guilty of genocide and sentenced to lifelong prison sentences.

Currently in the Ukrainian information space, there is an opinion on the need to establish a tribunal as an instrument of justice. However, it should not be forgotten that Russia still has the right to Veto in the UN Security Council. So in our case it will be more hybrid court.

And the team of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine together with the experts is already beginning to undertake measures to achieve the goal - the establishment of a tribunal. The tribunal will establish the tribunal with the decision of the UN Security Council, but as an intergovernmental agreement.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, together with the leading Ukrainian and Western international lawyers, presented on March 4, 2022 of the Declaration of the Intent to establish a special tribunal for the crime of aggression.

The legal basis for the establishment of such a tribunal is a precedent of the Nirnberg process, when the Allies founded the Nirnberg tribunal on the basis of the Agreement during the Second World War to condemn the war criminals of the third rip. However, in the Declaration, it is stated that a special court, if established, supplemented by the ICTY jurisdiction instead of acting in parallel.

Thus, for the punishment of the crime of aggression, Ukraine initiates the creation of an intergovernmental tribunal - the Special Court for the Crime of Aggression on Ukraine, which will have jurisdiction over the signatory States of the Declaration.

At present, it is suggested that the Tribunal is held in Harkov. As a result of the work of the Russian aggressor, the city has suffered devastating strikes and terrible civilian victims. In addition, in Kharkov, in 1943, one of the first tribunals against Nazi war criminals was held. So this vision is very symbolic.

National trial

Others, although unlikely, the way to convict the Russian Federation leadership can be a national trial in Russia itself. This scenario is, of course, only possible if the regime in this country is changed to democratic.

There is such an example in world history. From 1976 to 1983, the authorities in Argentina were in the hands of the military hunte. This period is marked by the

so-called "dirty war" - a series of intimidation, murder and abduction of the regime opponent and the Foklad Rat, which led to the removal of the military hunta from the power.

Attempts to hide the repression of the "small winning war" were failed - Argentina lost from the UK in less than three months in 1982.

A year later, Hunta lost power and newly elected President Raul Alfonsin issued a decree for investigating the leader of the military dictatorship and their allies.

It turned out that about 30,000 Argentines were killed during the "dirty war".

In 1985, representatives of First Hunte were reported: General Horhe Rafael Vide (President of Argentina from 1976 to 1981), Admiral Maser and General Vozduhavljeva Agosti. For crimes against humanity, the first two were sentenced to life imprisonment.

Three governments changed over the military dictatorship during the military dictatorship. All their representatives condemned the Supreme Civil Court of Argentina.

This trial is considered one of the most important in the history of conviction of the highest leadership of the state.

Returning to Russia, it should be noted that such an option to condemn the highest state top could be important to the Russians. After all, the trial of dictators has contributed to the development of Argentine democratic institutions and national reconciliation.

But the question is how much this option will help to meet the request of Ukrainians for justice. It is clear that in Russia, Putin's regime has also committed countless dangerous life crimes. However, here should be understood whether it is important for us that the dictatorial regime is simply punished or punished for aggression on Ukraine?

Then we will understand how much Argentine scenario is acceptable for Ukraine. In addition, the realization of such a scenario must develop an appropriate internal situation - the dissatisfaction of the ruling elites and the wide masses of the Russian society, their readiness to radical and painful changes.

Thus, all three scenarios are, how practice shows, rather probably under certain circumstances. The Patin will judge the established tribunal, the national or international criminal tribunal - the most important thing that every episode of severe crimes during the Russian aggression to our country is established and punished. After all, in the absence of appropriate preventive measures to deter

aggression, punishment for serious criminal offenses as a result should be inevitable.

The most likely option for us is now the ICC investigation of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide crimes and the Special Court for the Crimes of Aggression to Ukraine - the aggression made by Russia, which lasts until today.