来稿 | 乌克兰提交国际法院的起诉书（译文）
《刑事法判解》由北京大学法学院主办，陈兴良教授任主编，车浩教授任执行主编，人民法院出版社发行。刊物关注刑事司法领域的实务问题，诚邀学界和实务界同仁赐稿。
公号&刊物来稿请至：xingshifapanjie@126.com
序言
1. 依据《法院规约》第36条第1款和第40条以及《法院规则》第40条，乌克兰特此提出对俄罗斯联邦的诉讼申请。
2. 此项申请关涉到乌克兰与俄罗斯联邦之间对于1948年《防止及惩治灭绝种族罪公约》（下称“《灭种公约》”或“《公约》”）之理解、适用及实施的争议。乌克兰将在下文中进一步说明，俄罗斯联邦谎称乌克兰的卢甘斯克州与顿涅茨克州发生了种族灭绝行为，并据此承认所谓的“卢甘斯克人民共和国”以及“顿涅茨克人民共和国”，继而宣布并实施针对乌克兰的“特别军事行动”，目的是防止和惩治所谓的种族灭绝行为，而这没有事实根据。基于这一虚假指控，俄罗斯目前正在对乌克兰实施军事入侵，严重且广泛地侵犯了乌克兰人民的人权。
3. 乌克兰坚决否认发生过任何此类种族灭绝行为并提出本申请，以证明俄罗斯以防止及惩治所谓种族灭绝为目的在乌克兰境内实施的针对行动没有合法依据。
4. 乌克兰与俄罗斯联邦均为联合国成员，因而受到包括第36条第1款在内的《法院规约》约束，该条规定法庭管辖“包括……现行条约及协约……所特定之一切事件”。
5. 乌克兰与俄罗斯联邦均为《灭种公约》缔约国。
6. 《灭种公约》第9条规定：
缔约国间关于本公约的解释、适用或实施产生的争议，包括关于某一国家对于灭绝种族罪或第三条所列任何其他行为的责任的争议，经争议一方的请求，应提交国际法院。
7. 乌克兰与俄罗斯联邦之间对于《灭种公约》第9条的理解、适用或实施存在争议。
8. 俄罗斯联邦宣称在卢甘斯克州与顿涅茨克州发生了种族灭绝行为，并表示将采取军事以及其它行动来针对乌克兰，以达到防止及惩治这种所谓灭绝种族行为的目的，其中就包括承认乌克兰领土内所谓的独立州：
a. 俄罗斯联邦总统在2022年2月21日的讲话中提到，基于乌克兰掌控的顿巴斯地区人民遭受了所谓的“可怕经历以及种族灭绝”，而“做出早应做出的决定，并立即承认顿涅茨克人民共和国和卢甘斯克人民共和国的独立和主权”。
b. 普京总统在2022年2月24日对俄国人民的讲话中同样表达针对乌克兰军事行动的目的是“制止那些暴行以及对当地数百万人民的种族灭绝行为，这些人将希望寄托在俄罗斯身上”。
c. 在2022年2月23日联合国安理会的讲话中，俄罗斯联邦常驻代表宣称，普京总统“决定在顿巴斯发起军事行动”；“这次特别行动的目标是保护那些因基辅政权受害并遭受种族灭绝的人民”。常驻代表接着说道：“为确保这一点，我们将寻求乌克兰的去军事化和去纳粹化”。
d. 在2022年2月25日的记者招待会上，俄罗斯外交部长谢尔盖·拉夫罗夫同样以“防止新纳粹以及那些宣扬种族灭绝方法的人统治这个国家”来为俄罗斯针对乌克兰的军事行动提供正当性。
e. 在2022年2月25日的采访中，俄罗斯驻欧盟大使在被问及普京总统以种族灭绝为由来为俄罗斯对乌克兰非法行为辩护时说到，“我们可以求助于国际法中对种族灭绝的官方用语。如果你读过这一定义，就会发现完全符合现状。”
9. 乌克兰坚决否认发生过任何此类种族灭绝行为，以及俄罗斯联邦以防止和惩治《公约》第一条规定的种族灭绝为目的，采取针对乌克兰的行动没有任何法律依据。《公约》第八条进一步确认了俄罗斯行为的非法性。
10. 为了回应俄罗斯的说法，乌克兰外交部发布声明称，乌克兰“坚决否认俄罗斯对种族灭绝的指控，否认任何试图以这种捏造性指控来作为俄罗斯非法侵略借口的行为。”并注意到根据《灭种公约》，“俄罗斯的说法毫无根据且荒谬。”
11. 对于《灭种公约》理解与实施的争议就这样产生了，乌克兰与俄罗斯对于以下问题持相反观点：乌克兰境内是否存在种族灭绝，以及《公约》第一条是否为俄罗斯“防止和惩治”所谓的种族灭绝而针对乌克兰使用军事力量提供了根据。
12. 因此根据《法院规约》第36条第1款以及《灭种公约》第9条，法院有权审理乌克兰在本申请书中对俄罗斯联邦提出的要求。
13. 为了维护其对乌克兰的影响力和主导地位，自从2014年春季以来，俄罗斯联邦与包括普京在内的个人有计划地为顿涅茨克人民共和国（“DPR”）以及卢甘斯克人民共和国（“LPR”）在内的非法武装团体提供重武器、金钱、人员以及训练。在俄罗斯的积极支持下，这些由亲俄乌克兰人和俄罗斯国民组成的非法武装团体跨越顿涅茨克州和卢甘斯克州出现在乌克兰东部的顿巴斯地区。2014年3月和4月，这些非法武装团体占领了顿涅茨克和卢甘斯克的公共行政大楼。2014年5月11日，顿涅茨克人民共和国与卢甘斯克人民共和国宣布其政治目标是脱离基辅实现自治，并举行了一场国际社会严厉谴责的所谓“全民公投”。
14. 2014年9月初，乌克兰政府和俄罗斯政府正在明斯克就结束乌克兰东部冲突进行谈判时，顿涅茨克人民共和国与卢甘斯克人民共和国提出了包括乌克兰政府承认其领土的特殊地位并授予他们更大的自治权；授予其将俄语作为官方语言的权利；保证每个地区都有能力与俄罗斯建立独立的经济关系在内的一系列政治要求。
15. 2015年2月，在明斯克进一步谈判前夕以及非法武装团体对乌克兰平民发动的一场袭击中，顿涅茨克人民共和国与卢甘斯克人民共和国的领导人均再次提出了一系列详尽的政治要求，包括“通过授予顿巴斯各个地区自治权来实现广泛权力下放在内的乌克兰宪法改革”。为了实现这些目标，顿涅茨克人民共和国与卢甘斯克人民共和国进行了联合国人权委员会（“OHCHR”）所称的“威吓和恐怖统治”。
16. 此前国际法院已经在审理一个关于适用《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》以及《消除一切形式种族歧视的国际公约》的未决案件（乌克兰诉俄罗斯联邦案）。乌克兰在该案的诉状中记录了俄罗斯从2014年起持续违反国际义务的行为：未采取措施来制止对顿涅茨克人民共和国与卢甘斯克人民共和国的武器供应和其它供给，以及在被占领的克里米亚实施歧视行动。在过去的几天里，俄罗斯业已超越了上述严重违法国际法的行为，以卢甘斯克州与顿涅茨克州不存在的种族灭绝为由进行指控，并发起对乌克兰的全面入侵。
17. 此外，2019年12月俄罗斯、乌克兰、法国和德国的领导人进行会面时，确认了其在2015年明斯克协议中达成的承诺，但此后一直没有任何进展。在暴力事件激增后，乌克兰联合部队行动处在2020年7月寻求建立新的停火协议。在出现多次违反2020年7月停火协议的情况后，战火于2021年12月得以全面平息。
18. 在乌克兰边境附近进行了一次有据可查的军事集结之后，2022年2月21日，俄罗斯总统发布声明称其“认为有必要做出早应做出的决定，并立即承认顿涅茨克人民共和国和卢甘斯克人民共和国的独立和主权”。普京总统以所谓的乌克兰资助、容忍或以某种方式实施毫无根据的“可怕经历以及种族灭绝”为由合理化俄罗斯的行动：
顿巴斯地区人民每天都在遭受炮火攻击。近期组建的大型军事力量使用攻击性无人机、重型装备、导弹、大炮以及多管火箭发射器。对平民的杀戮、封锁以及对包括儿童、妇女与老人在内的民众实施的虐待依然有增无减。正如我们所言，这一情况看不到尽头。
与此同时，我们一向宣称其才是所谓文明世界唯一代表的西方同仁却选择视而不见，就好像四百多万人民面对的可怕经历以及种族灭绝并不存在。但是这些事情确实存在，而原因仅仅是这些人民不赞成2014年由西方支持的乌克兰政变并反对向尼安德特人、侵略性民族主义和新纳粹主义的转化，这些在乌克兰已被提升到国家政策的高度。他们正在为生活在自己的土地上、说自己语言以及保护自己的文化和传统等基本权利而斗争。
19. 普京总统于同日分别签署了承认顿涅茨克人民共和国以及卢甘斯克人民共和国的行政命令。普京总统同样分别与所谓的顿涅茨克人民共和国以及卢甘斯克人民共和国签署了友好合作互助条约。这些所谓的条约于2022年2月22日获得批准。
20. 2022年2月24日，普京总统宣布其已经做出实施“特别军事行动”的决定并表示“这次行动的目的是保护八年以来受到基辅政权羞辱和种族灭绝的人民。”普京总统补充道：
正如我之前讲话中所言，你们应当抱着同情心看待当地发生的事情。不能对其放任自流。我们不得不制止那些暴行以及对当地数百万人民实施的种族灭绝行为，这些人将希望寄托在俄罗斯以及我们所有人身上。这些人民的企盼、感受及痛苦正是我们决定承认顿巴斯人民共和国的主要动力。
21. 关于卢甘斯克州与顿涅茨克州存在种族灭绝行为的说法毫无事实依据，同时俄罗斯没有提出任何证据来证实其指控。实际上，联合国人权委员会对于乌克兰人权状况的报告中并未提到任何关于乌克兰境内存在种族灭绝的证据。这些报告均为“从评估可靠且可信的一手以及二手来源搜集到的确切信息”并且“报告中的信息满足‘有合理理由相信’的证据标准”。2021年9月23日发行的人权报告，涵盖了2021年2月1日到7月31日的情况，其中没有提到关于种族灭绝的任何证据。最新的乌克兰人权状况涵盖了2021年8月1日到10月31日的情况，“聚焦于乌克兰主要人权问题的进展”并且其中同样没有提到关于种族灭绝的任何证据。
22. 除了这些人权报告，联合国人权委员会也发布了相关报道，比如其最近对2019年11月1日到2021年10月31日之间乌克兰基本自由状况的报道。上述报道同样没有提到任何表明乌克兰领土内发生种族灭绝的迹象。考虑到缺乏证明存在种族灭绝行为的证据，俄罗斯关于严重侵犯人权行为的指控显然毫无根据。俄罗斯联邦宣称的乌克兰“去纳粹化”目标明显是其无端发起侵略战争的借口。
23. 乌克兰因俄罗斯无端入侵而遭受的损害将无法估量。联合国秘书长将这一即将爆发的战争称为“可能是本世纪初以来最具破坏性的战争”。除了导致平民和军人伤亡的猛烈炮击外，俄罗斯也针对乌克兰基础设施发起了大规模的网络攻击。联合国政治和建设和平事务部秘书长注意到，俄罗斯局势升级造成“不可接受的高昂代价——人类的痛苦和毁灭”。
24. 简言之，俄罗斯完全改变了《灭种公约》的含义——谎称存在种族灭绝行为，并以此作为其严重侵犯乌克兰全国数百万人民人权行为的根据。让俄罗斯的谎言愈加具有攻击性和讽刺意味的是，似乎正是俄罗斯策划在乌克兰境内实施种族灭绝行为。俄罗斯故意杀害并严重伤害乌克兰民族的成员——符合《公约》第2条种族灭绝行为的规定。这些行为必须和普京总统否认存在乌克兰民族说法的糟糕言论结合起来看待，这表明俄罗斯故意杀害的行为中包含灭种故意。
25. 俄罗斯对乌克兰和国际秩序的袭击受到国际社会的广泛谴责。为回应俄罗斯联邦对乌克兰的武装冲突，欧洲理事会于2022年2月25日暂停俄罗斯在该组织决策机构和辩论论坛的代表权。联合国安理会一项谴责俄罗斯行为的决议草案，只因俄罗斯联邦的否决权而未能通过。美洲国家组织（OAS）也已谴责俄罗斯“赤裸裸的侵略，这种行为在欧洲已经70多年没有出现过了”。
26. 乌克兰认为，俄罗斯联邦基于所谓的种族灭绝行为于2022年2月24日宣布以“特别军事行动”的方式实施针对乌克兰的言论及措施，以及在军事行动之前承认（共和国独立）的行为均不符合《公约》规定并侵犯了乌克兰免于非法行为干涉的权利，这些非法行为就包括为防止和惩治毫无事实根据的种族灭绝行为而实施军事打击。
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
APPLICATION
INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS
filed in the Registry of the Court on 26 February 2022
DISPUTE RELATING TO ALLEGATIONS OF GENOCIDE (UKRAINE v. RUSSIAN FEDERATION)
_________
APPLICATION INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS SUBMITTED BY UKRAINE
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In accordance with Articles 36(1) and 40 of the Statute of the Court and Article 38 of the Rules of Court, Ukraine hereby submits this Application instituting proceedings against the Russian Federation.
2. This Application concerns a dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation relating to the interpretation, application and fulfilment of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the “Genocide Convention” or “Convention”). As Ukraine further explains below, the Russian Federation has falsely claimed that acts of genocide have occurred in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine, and on that basis recognized the so-called “Donetsk People’s Republic” and “Luhansk People’s Republic,” and then declared and implemented a “special military operation” against Ukraine with the express purpose of preventing and punishing purported acts of genocide that have no basis in fact. On the basis of this false allegation, Russia is now engaged in a military invasion of Ukraine involving grave and widespread violations of the human rights of the Ukrainian people.
3. Ukraine emphatically denies that any such genocide has occurred and brings this Application to establish that Russia has no lawful basis to take action in and against Ukraine for the purpose of preventing and punishing any purported genocide.
II. JURISDICTION OF THE COURT
4. Ukraine and the Russian Federation are both Members of the United Nations and therefore bound by the Statute of the Court, including Article 36 (1), which provides that the Court’s jurisdiction “comprises . . . all matters specially provided for . . . in treaties and conventions in force.”
5. Ukraine and the Russian Federation are both parties to the Genocide Convention.
6. Article IX of the Genocide Convention provides: Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or for any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.
7. There is a dispute between Ukraine and the Russian Federation within the meaning of Article IX relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the Genocide Convention.
8. The Russian Federation claims that acts of genocide have occurred in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine, and has undertaken military and other actions against Ukraine, including recognizing purportedly independent states on Ukrainian territory, with the express purpose of preventing and punishing such alleged acts of genocide:
a. In his address of 21 February 2022, the President of the Russian Federation referred to “horror and genocide” allegedly suffered by Donbas communities at the hands of the State of Ukraine as the basis to “take a long overdue decision and to immediately recognise the independence and sovereignty of the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic.”
b. In his address to the Russian people on the morning of 24 February 2022, President Putin similarly explained that the purpose of the military operation against Ukraine was “to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia.”
c. In remarks to the United Nations Security Council on 23 February 2022, the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation asserted that President Putin “decided to start a military operation in Donbas” and that “[t]he goal of this special operation is protection of people who have been victimized and exposed to genocide by the Kiev regime.” The Permanent Representative continued: “To ensure this, we will seek demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine.”
d. At a press conference on 25 February 2022, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov also justified Russia’s military actions against Ukraine as “preventing the neo-Nazis and those who promote methods of genocide from ruling this country.”
e. In an interview on 25 February 2022, the Russian Ambassador to the European Union was asked about President Putin’s reference to genocide as justification for Russia’s unlawful acts against Ukraine and said, “[w]e can turn to the official term of genocide as coined in international law. If you read the definition it fits pretty well.”
9. Ukraine emphatically denies that any such genocide has occurred, and that the Russian Federation has any lawful basis to take action in and against Ukraine for the purpose of preventing and punishing genocide under Article I of the Convention. The unlawfulness of Russia’s actions is further confirmed by Article VIII of the Convention.
10. In response to Russia’s claim, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine issued a statement that Ukraine “strongly denies Russia’s allegations of genocide and denies any attempt to use such manipulative allegations as an excuse for Russia’s unlawful aggression,” noting that under the Genocide Convention, “Russia’s claims are baseless and absurd.”
11. A dispute has therefore arisen relating to the interpretation and application of the Genocide Convention, as Ukraine and Russia hold opposite views on whether genocide has been committed in Ukraine, and whether Article I of the Convention provides a basis for Russia to use military force against Ukraine to “prevent and to punish” this alleged genocide.
12. Accordingly, pursuant to Article 36 (1) of the Court’s Statute and Article IX of the Genocide Convention, the Court has jurisdiction to hear the claims submitted in the present Application by Ukraine against the Russian Federation.
III. FACTS
13. In an effort to assert its influence and dominance over Ukraine, since the Spring of 2014, the Russian Federation and persons within Russia have systematically supplied illegal armed groups, including the Donetsk People’s Republic (“DPR”) and the Luhansk People’s Republic (“LPR”), with heavy weaponry, money, personnel, and training. With active Russian support, these illegal armed groups comprised of pro-Russian Ukrainians and Russian nationals emerged in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine, spanning the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.9 In March and April 2014, these illegal armed groups occupied public and administration buildings in Donetsk and Luhansk.10 On 11 May 2014, the DPR and LPR announced their political goal as autonomy from Kyiv, and held a purported “referendum” that has been roundly condemned.
14. In early September 2014, in the midst of negotiations in Minsk between the Ukrainian and Russian governments to end the conflict in eastern Ukraine, the DPR and LPR articulated a list of political demands, including that the Ukrainian government recognize the special status of their territories and grant them greater autonomy; grant them the right to make Russian their official language; and grant each region the ability to engage in its own economic relations with Russia.
15. In February 2015, on the eve of further negotiations in Minsk and amidst a wave of attacks on Ukrainian civilians by the illegal armed groups, leaders of both the DPR and LPR again released a detailed list of political demands including “constitutional reforms in Ukraine, including extensive decentralization by granting individual areas of the Donbas an autonomous status.” In service of these aims, the DPR and LPR engaged in what the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (“OHCHR”) has described as a “reign of intimidation and terror.”
16. The Court already has pending before it a case on the merits concerning the Application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation). Ukraine’s pleadings in that case document Russia’s sustained violations of its international obligations from 2014 onwards by failing to take measures to prevent the provision of weapons and other support for the DPR and LPR, as well as engaging in a campaign of discrimination in occupied Crimea. Over the last few days, Russia has moved beyond these already serious breaches of international law to launch a fullscale invasion against Ukraine, based on false and pretextual allegations of genocide in Ukraine’s Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts.
17. Further, in December 2019, leaders from Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany met to affirm their commitment to the deal reached in Minsk in 2015, but there has been no progress since.15 After a spike in violence, the Joint Forces Operation of Ukraine sought to strengthen a new ceasefire in July 2020.16 A full ceasefire was restored in December 2021 after numerous violations of the July 2020 ceasefire.
18. After a well-documented military build-up around Ukraine’s borders, on 21 February 2022, the President of Russia issued a statement announcing that he “consider[ed] it necessary to take a long overdue decision and to immediately recognise the independence and sovereignty of the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Luhansk People’s Republic.” President Putin grounded Russia’s actions on unsupported allegations of “horror and genocide” allegedly sponsored, tolerated or somehow initiated by Ukraine:
Not a single day goes by without Donbass communities coming under shelling attacks. The recently formed large military force makes use of attack drones, heavy equipment, missiles, artillery and multiple rocket launchers. The killing of civilians, the blockade, the abuse of people, including children, women and the elderly, continues unabated. As we say, there is no end in sight to this.
Meanwhile, the so-called civilised world, which our Western colleagues proclaimed themselves the only representatives of, prefers not to see this, as if this horror and genocide, which almost 4 million people are facing, do not exist. But they do exist and only because these people did not agree with the West-supported coup in Ukraine in 2014 and opposed the transition towards the Neanderthal and aggressive nationalism and neo-Nazism which have been elevated in Ukraine to the rank of national policy. They are fighting for their elementary right to live on their own land, to speak their own language, and to preserve their culture and traditions.
19. On the same day, President Putin signed an Executive Order on the Recognition of the Donetsk People’s Republic and an Executive Order on the Recognition of the Luhansk People’s Republic. President Putin also signed a Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance with the so-called Donetsk People’s Republic and a Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance with the so-called Luhansk People’s Republic. These purported treaties were ratified on
22 February 2022.22.
20. On 24 February 2022, President Putin announced that he had made a decision to carry out a special military operation” and that “[t]he purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime.” President Putin added:
As I said in my previous address, you cannot look without compassion at what is happening there. It became impossible to tolerate it. We had to stop that atrocity, that genocide of the millions of people who live there and who pinned their hopes on Russia, on all of us. It is their aspirations, the feelings and pain of these people that were the main motivating force behind our decision to recognise the independence of the Donbass people’s republics.
21. There is no factual basis for the existence of genocide in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts, and Russia has advanced no evidence to substantiate its allegation. Indeed, reports on the human rights situation in Ukraine by the OHCHR do not mention any evidence of genocide in Ukraine. These reports are “verified information collected from primary and secondary sources that are assessed as credible and reliable” and “included in the report where the ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ standard of proof is met.”25 The human rights report published on 23 September 2021, covering a period from 1 February to 31 July 2021, does not mention any evidence of genocide. The most recent update on the human rights situation in Ukraine, covering the period from 1 August to 31 October 2021 “focuses on key human rights developments in Ukraine” and also does not mention any evidence of genocide.
22. In addition to these human rights reports, the OHCHR also publishes related reports, like its recent report on fundamental freedoms in Ukraine covering the period from 1 November 2019 to 31 October 2021. Again, this report on fundamental freedoms mentioned no indication of genocide in Ukrainian territory. Given the lack of any evidence indicating acts of genocide, Russia clearly has no basis on which to allege such an egregious human rights violation. The Russian Federation’s claimed objective to “de-nazify” Ukraine is a transparent pretext for an unprovoked war of aggression.
23. The harm suffered by Ukraine due to Russia’s unprovoked invasion will be immeasurable. The U.N. Secretary-General called the impending war “what may be the most devastating war since the start of the century.” In addition to heavy shelling and civilian and military casualties, Russia has also launched a large-scale cyberattack aimed at Ukrainian infrastructure.31 The U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs noted the “unacceptably high cost – in human suffering and destruction” caused by Russia’s escalation.
24. In short, Russia has turned the Genocide Convention on its head – making a false claim of genocide as a basis for actions on its part that constitute grave violations of the human rights of millions of people across Ukraine. Russia’s lie is all the more offensive, and ironic, because it appears that it is Russia planning acts of genocide in Ukraine. Russia is intentionally killing and inflicting serious injury on members of the Ukrainian nationality – the actus reus of genocide under Article II of the Convention. These acts must be viewed together with President Putin’s vile rhetoric denying the very existence of a Ukrainian people, which is suggestive of Russia’s intentional killings bearing genocidal intent.
25. Russia’s assault on Ukraine and the international order has been widely condemned by the international community. In response to the Russian Federation’s armed attack on Ukraine, on 25 February 2022 the Council of Europe suspended Russia’s representation rights in the organization’s decision-making body and debate forum. Only the Russian Federation’s veto prevented the adoption of a draft U.N. Security Council resolution that would have condemned Russia’s actions. The Organization of American States (OAS) has also condemned Russia’s “naked aggression, the likes of which have not been seen in Europe for some 70 years.”
IV.LEGAL GROUNDS FOR UKRAINE’S CLAIMS
26. Ukraine claims that the Russian Federation’s declaration and implementation of measures in or against Ukraine in the form of a “special military operation” declared on 24 February 2022 on the basis of alleged genocide, as well as the recognition that preceded the military operation, is incompatible with the Convention and violates Ukraine’s right to be free from unlawful actions, including military attack, based on a claim of preventing and punishing genocide that is wholly unsubstantiated.
a. Article I of the Convention provides that “genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law” and that the Contracting Parties “undertake to prevent and punish such a crime.”
b. Article II of the Convention defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”
c. Article III of the Convention provides that “[t]he following acts shall be punishable: (a) Genocide; (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide; (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide; (d) Attempt to commit genocide; (e) Complicity in genocide.”
27. The duty to prevent and punish genocide enshrined in Article I of the Convention necessarily implies that this duty must be performed in good faith and not abused, and that one Contracting Party may not subject another Contracting Party to unlawful action, including armed attack, especially when it is based on a wholly unsubstantiated claim of preventing and punishing genocide.
28. Russia’s actions erode the core obligation of Article I of the Convention, undermine its object and purpose, and diminish the solemn nature of the Contracting Parties’ pledge to prevent and punish genocide.
29. The Russian Federation’s declaration and implementation of measures in the form of a “special military operation,” as well as acts of recognition, based on a false claim of genocide is incompatible with the Genocide Convention and violates Ukraine’s rights.
V. RELIEF SOUGHT
30. Ukraine respectfully requests the Court to:
a. Adjudge and declare that, contrary to what the Russian Federation claims, no acts of genocide, as defined by Article III of the Genocide Convention, have been committed in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine.
b. Adjudge and declare that the Russian Federation cannot lawfully take any action under the Genocide Convention in or against Ukraine aimed at preventing or punishing an alleged genocide, on the basis of its false claims of genocide in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine.
c. Adjudge and declare that the Russian Federation’s recognition of the independence of the so-called “Donetsk People’s Republic” and “Luhansk People’s Republic” on 22 February 2022 is based on a false claim of genocide and therefore has no basis in the Genocide Convention.
d. Adjudge and declare that the “special military operation” declared and carried out by the Russian Federation on and after 24 February 2022 is based on a false claim of genocide and therefore has no basis in the Genocide Convention.
e. Require that the Russian Federation provide assurances and guarantees of nonrepetition that it will not take any unlawful measures in and against Ukraine, including the use of force, on the basis of its false claim of genocide.
f. Order full reparation for all damage caused by the Russian Federation as a consequence of any actions taken on the basis of Russia’s false claim of genocide. 9
VI. JUDGE AD HOC
31. In accordance with the provisions of Article 31(2) of the Statute of the Court, and Article 35(1) of the Rules of the Court, Ukraine declares its intention to exercise its right to choose a judge ad hoc.
VII. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
32. Ukraine reserves the right to supplement and/or amend this Application, as well as the legal grounds invoked and the relief requested, as may be necessary to preserve and vindicate its rights under the Genocide Convention.
VIII. APPOINTMENT OF AGENT
33. Ukraine hereby designates as its Agent Mr. Anton Korynevich, Permanent Representative of the President of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
34. Ukraine hereby designates as its Co-Agent Ms. Oksana Zolotaryova, Director, International Law Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine.
35. Pursuant to Article 40(1) of the Rules of the Court, communications relating to this case should be sent to:
Embassy of Ukraine in the Kingdom of the Netherlands Zeestraat, 78 2518 AD The Hague Kingdom of the Netherlands
__________________________
Anton Korynevich Permanent Representative of the President of Ukraine in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea Agent of Ukraine __________________________
Oksana Zolotaryova Director, International Law Department Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Co-Agent of Ukraine
26 February 2022
▼ 推 荐 阅 读 ▼
R E C O M M E N D
《刑事法判解》征稿启事来稿 | 李耀：论洗钱罪中的“洗钱性”认识——美国联邦法院判例述评聚焦 | “江歌案”日本刑事判决回顾来稿 | 徐澍：从法国宪法委员会两则QPC裁决看没收的合宪性
来稿 | 唐韵：美国版“摇晃婴儿综合症”述评
来稿请至：xingshifapanjie@126.com
欢迎各种面向刑事司法实务的文章向公众号投稿，我们将择优刊登于《刑事法判解》的纸质刊物，为作者提供网络传播和纸质发表的双重渠道，为读者提供更快捷有效的实务信息。