In a significant legal development, the judges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) declared that Russia had breached elements of a UN anti-terrorism treaty. However, notably absent from their ruling was an assessment of Kyiv’s accusations that Moscow bore responsibility for the tragic downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over eastern Ukraine in 2014.
Concurrently, the ICJ judges concluded that Russia had violated an anti-discrimination treaty by failing to support Ukrainian language education in Crimea following the annexation of the peninsula in 2014. Despite these findings, the ruling proved to be a legal setback for Kyiv, as the court dismissed Ukraine’s appeals for reparations. Instead, the ICJ mandated Russia to comply with the obligations outlined in the respective treaties. This nuanced decision highlights the complex legal landscape surrounding the events in Ukraine and Crimea.
In 2017, Ukraine initiated legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), colloquially known as the World Court, alleging that Russia breached an anti-terrorism treaty by financially supporting pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine.
The judges at the court have now ruled that Moscow indeed violated the UN’s anti-terrorism treaty. This finding is based on the failure of the Russian authorities to conduct a thorough investigation into credible claims suggesting that funds from Russia were potentially directed towards supporting terrorist activities in Ukraine.
The 16-judge panel has instructed Russia to conduct an investigation into any credible allegations of terrorism financing. However, the panel declined Kyiv’s request for reparations in this matter.
Discriminatory Rulings
The court chose not to pass judgment on the MH17 incident, asserting that the violations related to funding terrorism only encompass monetary and financial support. It did not extend to the provision of weapons or training, as contended by Ukraine.
Ukraine contended that Russia supplied the missile system responsible for downing MH17, emphasizing the absence of an allegation of financial support in that particular incident.
During a hearing in The Hague last June, Russia vehemently rejected Ukraine’s claims of funding and controlling pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, dismissing them as fictional and “blatant lies.”
This prolonged legal saga, spanning nearly seven years, saw Kyiv accusing Russia of providing equipment and financial support to pro-Russian forces, including rebels responsible for the MH17 tragedy in July 2014. In November 2022, a Dutch court sentenced two Russians and a Ukrainian in absentia to life imprisonment for their involvement in the disaster.
Regarding Crimea, Ukraine’s assertions of Russia attempting to erase the culture of ethnic Tatars and Ukrainians were dismissed by the court. However, the court did find that Moscow fell short in supporting Ukrainian language education.
While the ICJ’s judgments are final and unappealable, the court lacks enforcement mechanisms for its rulings. On Friday, the ICJ is set to deliver a ruling in another case, where Ukraine accuses Moscow of falsely applying the 1948 Genocide Convention to justify its invasion on February 24, 2022.