The UN International Court of Justice has confirmed a smaller part of Ukraine's charges against Russia for terrorist financing, but this is still a result for Kyiv. This opinion was expressed to UNN by political scientist Olesya Yakhno, who noted that this decision will be an annex for further cases and will also be taken into account as part of Russia's aggression against Ukraine.
"The lawsuit was filed a long time ago and has two parts. One part of the lawsuit was filed in episodes starting back in 2014. These are two Conventions. For Donbas, it was Convention on the financing of terrorism, and for Crimea, it was a violation of racial discrimination. These conventions were chosen because Russia is a signatory and a party to them, which means that it was possible to obtain a court decision under these conventions and generally get Russia to enter this legal process," Yakhno said.
She noted that the court found Russia guilty of violating the Terrorist Financing Convention under one of its articles, No. 9.
"There are aspects that partially explain why. For example, in Crimea, Russia recognizes its legal status. That is, if Russia recognizes its status, it can be blamed. Since Russia does not recognize its status in Donbas, and we do not recognize the "DPR" and "LPR", but consider them Ukrainian territories occupied by Russia, it was not easy to prove the very composition of those accusations of specific financing of weapons, including the one that shot down MH17," Yakhno said.
Суд ООН у справі Україна проти росії визнав, що рф порушила договір організації - ЗМІ31.01.24, 17:19
According to her, the problem with the application of the Convention on Racial Discrimination is that Russia does not allow monitoring missions to Crimea.
"Russia recognizes its jurisdiction in Crimea, which means that charges can be brought against it, but it does not allow monitoring missions to go there to record these charges. That's why there is another problem here: Russia tells everyone that everything is fine there, we have different schools, we have Crimean Tatars, and we don't harass them, but we harass those who are allegedly extremists, and we don't allow real monitoring. So this also had its impact," Yakhno said.
However, she is convinced that the decision of the International Court of Justice is still a result for Ukraine.
It is still a result for us. The result on Donbas will allow us to use this in other court cases in the future, referring to the International Court of Justice. After all, there are many lawsuits, including other courts that consider cases of genocide and child abduction. Therefore, this will be an addition to the materials that are already available. But in principle, we see how difficult it is, and how long this case has been going on. The fact that only a part of our charges were adjudicated and Russia was found guilty shows how difficult it is to prove Russia's guilt in the conditions of the hybrid war (in 2014 - ed.)
Міжнародний суд ООН оголосив рішення за позовом України проти рф: деталі31.01.24, 18:01
However, she noted that there are many other lawsuits that have already been filed based on the materials collected after the full-scale invasion in 2022. The evidence there is absolutely "transparent" because there are satellite images and so on.
"A lot of work has been done since 2014, and it was not easy to collect evidence. It is good that this decision was made at all, because we know that courts take a long time. The outcome in Donbas will allow us to appeal to other courts as well. It will be an annex for further cases and this episode will also be taken into account as part of the Russian aggression against Ukraine in general," Yakhno said.