Elena Tonkacheva: Russia should seriously consider which place it will take in Hague probe

wordpress.com

What will be the consequences of Russia’s motion to the Hague probe against Ukrainian authorities for “decoupling civil war and genocide in the east”? And what CIS deputies mean by “quasi-court”?

To try in court new Ukrainian authorities, Russia’s State Duma initiated the foundation of the Court of human rights within the framework of CIS.

This initiative was suggested by Leonid Slutsky, the head of the State Duma committee of CIS affairs, on My 6, who told journalists that Ukrainian authorities should be convicted as criminals of war, and accused them of genocide of their own people.

Sergei Naryshkin, the speaker of the State Duma lower house of parliament believes that the genocide is taking place in Ukraine. “We face a true genocide of Russian and Ukrainian peoples already in the 21st century,” he stated.

But what is more, Russia’s Duma asked foreign ministry to initiate Hague probe in Kiev regime actions for “decoupling civil war and genocide in the east”.

Thus, united Russia faction’s lawmaker of the State Duma lower house of parliament Mikhail Markelov asked the country’s Foreign Ministry to initiate an inquiry in actions of current Kiev authorities at the Hague International Criminal Court. The lawmaker will send an address to this effect to Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday.

“An individual cannot address to the Hague International Criminal Court, because this is within jurisdiction of a state,” he told ITAR-TASS, adding that “I ask the Foreign Ministry to initiate this address from Russia.” In his words, the initiative dwells on facts of genocide against Russian-speaking population, primarily recent events in the Ukrainian Black Sea port city of Odessa where civilians were actually burnt alive.

Speaking on military actions in Ukraine, he recalled these crimes are also “within jurisdiction of the international court, because the political leadership gives orders and the so-called national guard or military perform them.” “We have already had a precedent when such international crimes were tried and Yugoslavian leaders Slobodan Milosevic and Ratko Mladic were convicted for them. They were accused of similar crimes, including execution of civilians,” he said. Markelov believes that the degree of responsibility of the Kiev regime can be easily found with available huge amount of evidence, including testimony of eyewitnesses and historic videos.

Asked about chances to try the case in the Hague International Probe, Markelov stated that the international criminal court should reply to such addresses. The lawmaker is confident that a response will follow, but it is still difficult to say whether it will be negative or positive. “The International Criminal Court should respond to facts of extermination of civilians by punitive squads and people who are in power in Ukraine should be brought to justice,” he stated.

Markelov also affirms that the genocide of the Russian speakers in Ukraine continues, noting that the situation will keep worsening in the future.

Before that Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation prepared a report titled “White book on violations of human rights and the rule of law in Ukraine (November 2013 — March 2014)”. On May 5 Vladimir Putin was already introduced to the “masterpiece” placed on 80 pages with illustrations and several categories of infringements of the law.

This sequence of weird initiatives introduced by the State Duma deputies and the variations of Hague probe the reporter of “EuroBelarus” Information Service discussed with Elena Tonkacheva, the head of the Legal Transformation Centre “Lawtrend”.

- How do you assess the initiative to found a Court of human rights within the framework of CIS?

- Basically simultaneously with the first documentation within the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) the Convention on Human Rights was adopted. The Convention should have been put into life by the standing organ – the Committee for Human Rights. 20 years have passed since then, but no such Committee was formed by CIS members yet. And the fact that the Convention was adopted without implementing it, without creating any administrative procedures and organs, only proves that the issue of human rights was never at the agenda in the Commonwealth of Independent States.

Unfortunately, within the framework of the CIS the issue of human rights was never prioritized in the spheres which required common actions – migration, freedom of movement, equal accessibility of education at the territory of the CIS and so on.

Today Russian Federation has quite a lot of problems with the realization of political rights and freedoms – for instance, with the freedom of mass media, freedom of associations and so on. And if such Committee together with the Court is created within the CIS, they will have a lot of work to do. Besides, it is hard to imagine that Russian Federation and other CIS members will delegate to these bodies people, who will be able to use only law and international understanding of human rights without referring to political contexts. We can hardly name one state within CIS which would be ready to start implementing at least basic human rights and freedoms; in the first turn, political ones. Before creating the Court according to the example of the European Court of Human Rights, the working body, which would be responsible for the realization of the Convention on Human Rights, should be created. And it is the Committee that should be this working body; and it is only after that when the quasi-court instance can be formed.

- Is there a possibility that such quasi-court will finally be formed, and in this Court Russia will play the role of judge and prosecutor, while Russia’s neighbors will appear at the prisoner's box one by one?

- We can assume such scenario, too; but it will mean that the human rights community will seriously analyze all that, and will get interested how these bodies are formed. And naturally, they are to be formed so that no one can be suspected in bias, in having only one voice in this body, and so on and so forth, to minimize the criticism.

If we assume that today we are forming the prototype of the European Court on human rights, there can be no national identity there. First of all, it is the fine reputation that the judges should possess in such court.

The only thing that I can guarantee: if this process exceeds the words and starts to get implemented, the human rights fighters will watch over it; moreover, we will take active part in discussing the procedures, according to which the court should be working.

- The State Duma is preparing the motion to the Hague probe against Ukrainian authorities for “decoupling civil war and genocide in the east”. What will be the International court in Hague reaction? Give your prognosis.

- As a person with the higher legal education, and, moreover, with rather good knowledge of rules and procedures used in the Hague probe, I will be expecting the document prepared by the Russian Federation to Hague probe with interest.

I think it will be a new word in the international law and in the international legislation. There is another problem with using the procedures of the Hague probe: I think that Russia should seriously consider which place it will take in Hague probe.

- Perhaps, the central part of the documents Russia prepares for Hague probe will be the so-called “White book” – the collection of violations of human rights and the rule of law in Ukraine (November 2013 — March 2014).

- Apart from interpreting facts, there is also necessity to be guided by the international norms. Thanks God, today the situation in Ukraine is closely watched by a lot of professional experts. Of course, by using media and propaganda Russia can interpret facts as it likes. But it doesn’t mean by any means that such free interpretation of facts will be enough, or in the least measure digestible for presenting it in the International probe.