In any given year, there are nearly 4 twelve active armed conflicts around the globe. These conflicts are violent, durable, far-reaching, and oftentimes characterized by widespread atrocities or even acts of genocide. Throughout history, acts of mass force have left a devastating mark on humanity, with the 20th century standing out as especially brutal. erstwhile 1 thinks of the most horrific atrocities, the crimes committed by Nazi Germany immediately come to mind. Yet, this list must besides include the brutal acts committed by the nipponese government during the Second planet War, as well as the genocides in Rwanda, Bosnia and Iraq. It is worth remembering that this all took place in just the 20th century. The survivors of all these horrible crimes have desperately longed for justice. While many ad hoc global tribunals have been established to deliver justice, another victims, specified as those of the Kurdish genocide in Iraq, have remained without any formal pathways for accountability.
Against the global backdrop of these fresh genocides, Europe stands out with a peculiarly troubling pattern of specified atrocities — from the Holocaust under Nazi Germany to the Bosnian genocide, and now, disturbingly, Ukraine.
Atrocities against Bosnian Muslims, the Srebrenica massacre and global responses
July 2024 marked the 29th anniversary of the Srebrenica genocide, erstwhile Bosnian Serbs planned and deliberately killed more than 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men in July 1995. The Srebrenica massacre is frequently regarded as the largest atrocity of its kind in Europe since the Second planet War.
These horrific events were prosecuted at the global level. An ad hoc global tribunal – the global Criminal Tribunal for the erstwhile Yugoslavia (ICTY) – was created in the Hague in May 1993 by United Nations safety Council Resolution 827. This was done to prosecute the main high-level perpetrators of many atrocities on the territory of the erstwhile Yugoslavia from 1991 onwards. The Tribunal established beyond a reasonable uncertainty that the killing of Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica was a genocide. The ICTY was the first global criminal tribunal to introduce convictions for genocide in Europe. The Tribunal besides issued indictments against 19 individuals for crimes committed in Srebrenica. All but 1 of this group are high-level perpetrators who planned and ordered the killing operation. In 1995 the ICTY convicted Radovan Karadžić, the leader of the Bosnian Serbs during the Bosnian War, for genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes primarily as part of a joint criminal enterprise. He was besides convicted of holding various leadership roles. Ratko Mladić, the army commander, was besides convicted in 1995 for akin charges, including genocide and crimes against humanity. This was done based on his function as a military leader and his engagement in a joint criminal enterprise, as well as another forms of criminal liability, including command responsibility. The Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milošević was besides charged and transported to The Hague to face accountability for crimes committed under his leadership not only in Bosnia but besides in Croatia and Kosovo. However, he passed distant before a verdict was rendered in his trial.
In 2007, the global Court of Justice (ICJ) affirmed that the atrocities committed in Srebrenica constituted acts of genocide and that Serbia had failed to fulfil its obligations to prevent the genocide. This ruling complemented the individual criminal accountability of circumstantial perpetrators by establishing state responsibility, thereby reinforcing obligations under global law for the broader global community.
Bucha, Irpin, Borodianka, Hostomel, Moshchun, Izium, Mariupol, the Olenivka prison massacre and Ohmatdyt – the “Ukrainian collective Srebrenica” is increasing all day…
With the ongoing war in Ukraine, there is mounting evidence and investigations into possible war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts that may meet the legal criteria for genocide. However, as of now, there has not been a confirmed and internationally recognized genocide of the same magnitude as the Srebrenica massacre. While it is hard to prove the actual scale of the harm done during the heat of the ongoing war, Ukraine might sadly overtake the massacre erstwhile it comes to lives lost in the Russian atrocities. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine up to November 2024, over 146,000 cases of war crimes have been registered by Ukrainian law enforcement agencies. According to NGO documenters, more than 8,000 people likely died from war-related causes in Mariupol alone between March 2022 and February 2023. Ukrainian documenters, global journalists and independent global organizations have found evidence of thousands of different cases of atrocities. This includes, for example, the killing and torture of civilians in Bucha, Irpin, Borodianka, Hostomel, Moshchun and Izium. This list of many Russian atrocities is unfortunately not exhaustive and keeps increasing all day…
From February 24th 2022 to the present day, the Russian army has been committing war crimes in the occupied Ukrainian territories that are akin to those committed by the Serbs in the occupied Bosnian territories and in peculiar in Srebrenica. The crimes in Srebrenica and those committed by Russian armed forces and mercenaries in Ukraine share the same context – those crimes are ethnically motivated and aimed at the demolition of an cultural community or an full nation. In Srebrenica, this targeted the Bosnian Muslims, while in Bucha and another locations, the mark was the Ukrainian population.
International responses to atrocities in erstwhile Yugoslavia as an example for justice in the Russian aggression against Ukraine
Today, more than 30 years since the Yugoslav Wars, Europe is one more time being tested on its commitment to its core values. The Russian aggression has created unprecedented challenges, bringing many horrendous atrocities and countless human rights violations to the European continent. Moscow continues to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity on the territory of Ukraine on a regular basis. Russia’s highest military and political leadership is besides ordering the demolition of Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure; deporting Ukrainian children; torturing and killing Ukrainian prisoners of war; and creating unbearable conditions of life for people in the occupied territories. Putin is repeating the crimes committed by Milošević and the Serbian leadership more than 30 years ago. Additionally, the Russian state’s position as a atomic power only complicates the situation. The reaction of the global community should be comparable to that concerning the crimes in erstwhile Yugoslavia, if not stronger. Ensuring that the perpetrators of the gravest global crimes are brought to justice will show that the power of global law admits no exceptions, even erstwhile dealing with powerful states wielding atomic weapons.
In February 2022, in consequence to Russia’s brutal aggression against Ukraine, a number of key Ukrainian human rights NGOs, specified as the Kharkiv Human Rights Group, the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union and the Center for civilian Liberties, launched the Global Initiative “Tribunal for Putin” (T4P). This advocates for a strong global consequence to Russia’s crimes in Ukraine in order to avoid impunity for high-level perpetrators.
The global Criminal Court (ICC), as the primary global body for pursuing the accountability of high-level perpetrators of global crimes, has swiftly taken action to address the situation. Following the full-scale Russian invasion on February 24th 2022, the ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan formally launched an investigation into possible war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Ukraine. This was supported by 39 ICC State Parties. Since then, the ICC has been actively active in gathering evidence on the ground, with Karim Khan making respective visits to Ukraine to measure the situation firsthand. In March 2023, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Russian president Vladimir Putin and the Russian Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, accusing them of illegally deporting Ukrainian children to Russia during the war between the 2 countries. The ICC prosecutor notes that the charges against Putin and Lvova-Belova are based on adequate evidence and that they are liable for “the illegal deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children from the occupied territories of Ukraine to the Russian Federation”. This contradicts circumstantial articles of the Rome Statute. The ICC noted that Russian forces had taken “hundreds of Ukrainian children from boarding schools and orphanages”. Karim Khan argues that these actions, aimed at permanently removing children from their homeland, constitute a violation of the Geneva Convention and qualify as war crimes. While the ICC prosecutor does not propose that there is genocidal intent behind the illegal deportation of Ukrainian children, as any charges of genocide would require demonstrating circumstantial intent to destroy, in full or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or spiritual group, Ukraine has been gathering evidence to support specified claims. The determination of whether genocide is being committed remains subject to the ICC’s further investigations and prosecutions.
This year, the ICC issued another arrest warrants against high-level Russian military officials. These are Lieutenant General Sergei Kobylash, the commander of long-range aviation in the Russian Aerospace Forces; Admiral Viktor Sokolov, the commander of the Black Sea Fleet; the erstwhile Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu; and the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Valery Gerasimov. These individuals were highlighted for their alleged function in attacking energy and civilian infrastructure in Ukraine. The charges underscore the ICC’s position that the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure, resulting in crucial harm to the civilian population, can constitute both war crimes and crimes against humanity under global law. Thus, the issued arrest warrants are part of the Court’s efforts to bring to justice those from the Russian leadership most liable for serious violations of global law.
Yet, there is simply a crucial gap in the current justice strategy erstwhile it comes to holding perpetrators accountable for the crime of aggression. The ICC cannot prosecute acts of aggression committed by or within countries that are not members of the Rome Statute — like Russia. While the ICC can address war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide in Ukraine, it has no jurisdiction over Russia’s aggression. This limitation has fuelled calls to make a peculiar Tribunal specifically focused on prosecuting this crime in Ukraine to guarantee a comprehensive consequence to all the ongoing global crimes.
On November 21st 2022, the NATO Parliamentary Assembly adopted a resolution urging members and partners of the North Atlantic Alliance to establish a peculiar tribunal to prosecute the Russian leaders accountable for the crime of aggression. On November 23rd 2022, the European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the EU and its associate states to support the establishment of a peculiar tribunal for the crime of aggression by Russia against Ukraine. On January 19th 2023, it adopted yet another resolution on the establishment of specified a tribunal.
Yet, establishing a tribunal for the Russian aggression requires careful plan to guarantee adherence to the standards of global law, as well as the tribunal’s legitimacy in the global community. applicable issues like the tribunal’s format, jurisdiction, funding, logistical coordination, and applicable legal frameworks will request to be addressed. There are besides the issues of overcoming leaders’ immunities and managing proceedings and trials in absentia. Despite the challenges, the creation of specified a tribunal would represent a critical step toward comprehensive accountability for Russian aggression, upholding global law in order to complement existing legal mechanisms, and sending a strong message against impunity.
ICTY is, to any extent, the case that the global community should look up to erstwhile creating a tribunal for Russian leaders liable for aggression against Ukraine. The ICTY demonstrated how global criminal justice can be effectively applied to hold perpetrators accountable for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Overall, it set a benchmark for future tribunals. However, it did not have jurisdiction over the crime of aggression at the time. This gap was later addressed erstwhile the crime of aggression was incorporated into the Rome Statute of the global Criminal Court (ICC) through the 2010 Kampala Amendments, which became effective in 2018. By building on the successes and limitations of the ICTY, a peculiar tribunal for Russian aggression against Ukraine can leverage lessons learned, while filling jurisdictional gaps that earlier tribunals could not address.
Importantly, the ICTY was not a trial of defeated states as seen in the post-war prosecutions of German and nipponese regimes. Instead, it prosecuted individuals who faced only a home political defeat. A akin script could unfold with the Putin regime, making it essential for the global community to take proactive measures. Delaying the establishment of a peculiar tribunal for Russian aggression in Ukraine effectively grants impunity, allowing Putin and another Russian officials to commit further crimes. This includes acts of a genocidal nature. While it is not always in our power to prevent fresh crimes, it is our sacred work to bring those liable to justice. By acting decisively, we, as the global community, can send a powerful message that impunity will not be tolerated in modern democracies and that the regulation of law serves as a shield against tyranny, aggression and atrocities.
Kateryna Kyrychenko is simply a Legal Officer and Ukraine Program manager at the pro bono law firm the Public global Law and Policy Group (PILPG). She is working on legal issues focused on accountability for Russian war crimes in Ukraine, and is presently pursuing a PhD in global Law (National University of “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy”).
Andrii Kutsyk holds a PhD in doctrine of Media (Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University) and a Master’s Degree in east European Studies (University of Warsaw). He is presently a investigation Fellow at the Institute of Political discipline at the University of Gdańsk and a associate of the investigation Institute for European Policy. In 2024, he besides received the Ivan Vyhovsky Prize (University of Rzeszów).
Dionizy Akulicz holds a Master’s Degree in east European Studies (University of Warsaw).
Please support New east Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.
