فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌ المللی

فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌ المللی

توسل به زور برای پیشگیری از ژنوسید: جدال حقوقی اوکراین و روسیه در دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی مستقل

نویسنده
عضو هیأت علمی پژوهشکده تحقیق و توسعه علوم انسانی (سمت)
چکیده
پس از انضمام شبه‌ جزیره کریمه به روسیه در سال 2014، دولت اوکراین اقدامات سیاسی و حقوقی خود را برای مقابله با این اقدام به شکل‌های گوناگون انجام داده است. به طور مشخص، این دولت از طریق توسل به شیوه‌های مختلف حقوقی حل و فصل اختلاف، دعاوی متعددی را علیه دولت روسیه در محاکم متعددی مطرح کرده است. دو روز پس از تهاجم روسیه به این کشور در 24 فوریه 2022، دولت اوکراین دعوای جدیدی را علیه این کشور در دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری مطرح نمود. خواسته اوکراین در این دعوا موضوع بحث نوشتار حاضر است: آیا می‌توان با توسل به زور نسبت به پیشگیری یا مجازات ارتکاب جنایت ادعایی ژنوسید اقدام کرد؟ این پرسش محور پرونده مزبور را تشکیل می‌دهد؛ به نحوی که طرفین دعوا و قضات دیوان نظرات کاملاً متعارضی را در این خصوص مطرح کرده‌اند. البته نکات متعدد دیگری نیز در این قضیه می‌تواند مورد توجه قرار گیرد و در این خصوص، نوشتارهای دیگری به این مسائل خواهند پرداخت. با این وجود، پاسخ دیوان به پرسش ارتباط میان توسل به زور برای پیشگیری و مجازات جنایت ژنوسید، اولویت داشته و می‌تواند در مسیر این پرونده تعیین‌کننده باشد.
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Use of Force to Prevent Genocide: A Legal Struggle between Ukraine and Russia in the International Court of Justice

نویسنده English

Abdollah Abedini
Faculty Member of the Institution for Research and Development in the Humanities (SAMT)
چکیده English

Since the annexation of the Crimean peninsula to Russia in 2014, Ukraine has taken various political and legal measures to counter this action. Specifically, it has filed numerous lawsuits against the Russia in various courts, resorting to various legal means of resolving disputes. Two days after Russia's invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, it instituted proceedings against Russia in the International Court of Justice. Ukraine's request before the Court is the subject of the present article: Can the use of force be resorted to prevent or punish the alleged crime of genocide? This question forms the core of the case; in a way, the litigants and the judges of the Court have expressed completely conflicting views in this regard. Of course, there are several other points that may be considered in this case that other articles will address them. However, the Court's answer to the question of the relationship between the use of force to prevent and punish the crime of genocide is a priority and can be determinative in the course of this case.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Dispute Resolution"
Provisional Measures "
Jus cogens"
Ukraine-Russia Conflict"
"
Plausibility"
  1. ابراهیم‌زاده، پوریا و امیرحسین ملکی‌زاده، جایگاه دفاع پیش‌دستانه از منظرحقوق بین‌الملل با تأکید بر تبیین موانه حقوقی ین‌المللی اعمال آن جهت حفاظت از غیرنظامیان، ، فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌المللی، 18(2)، 100-83، doi: 22034/isj.2021.288991.1509
  2. برزگرزاده، عباس، کارکرد و منزلت تصمیمات قضایی در رویه دیوان بین‌المللی دادگستری، فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌المللی، 17(2)، 51-27، doi: 22034/isj.2020.118191
  3. عابدینی، عبدالله و بهمن بحری خیاوی، تأثیر ماهیت قاعده منع ژنوسید در صدور دستور موقت: آموزه‌های دعوای گامبیا علیه میانمار، دوفصلنامه بین‌المللی حقوق بشر، در: doi: 22096/hr.2021.533279.1334
  4. A/RES/60/1, World Summit Outcome, 2005.
  5. Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Ukraine v. Russian Federation, Request for the indication of provisional measures, Order of 16 March 2022.
  6. Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Ukraine v. Russian Federation, Request for the indication of provisional measures, Order of 23 March 2022.
  7. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2007.
  8. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croatia v. Serbia), ICJ Reports 2015.
  9. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), ICJ Reports 2020.
  10. Baggiani, G. (2017). Ukraine’s Legal Cases against Russia in International Courts, Eurasia Daily Monitor, 14 (27), at: https://jamestown.org/program/ukraines-legal-cases-russia-international-courts/
  11. Ben-Naftali, O. (2009). The Obligations to Prevent and to Punish Genocide, in, Paola Gaeta (ed.), The UN Genocide Convention: A Commentary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  12. Declaration of Judge ad hoc Daudet, Ukraine v. Russian Federation,16 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-06-EN.pdf
  13. Declaration of Judge Bennouna, Ukraine v. Russian Federation, 16 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-02-EN.pdf
  14. Declaration of Judge Nolte, 16 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-05-EN.pdf
  15. Declaration of Judge Xue, 16 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-03-EN.pdf
  16. Declaration of Vice-President Gevorgian, 16 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-01-EN.pdf
  17. Document (with annexes) from the Russian Federation setting out its position regarding the alleged “lack of jurisdiction” of the Court in the case, 7 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/182/jurisdiction-admissibility
  18. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, International Law Commission, 2001.
  19. https://treaties.un.org
  20. Human Rights Council to establish Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine, (2022). at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/03/1113292
  21. Iwamoto, Y. (2002). The Protection of Human Life through Provisional Measures Indicated by the International Court of Justice, Leiden Journal of International Law , 15 (2), 345–366. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156502000171
  22. Kolb, R. (2022). Digging Deeper into the “Plausibility of Rights”-Criterion in the Provisional Measures Jurisprudence of the ICJ, Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals, 19 (3), 365-387, doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718034-12341428 
  23. Kulick, A. (2022). Provisional Measures after Ukraine v Russia, Jounal of International Dispute Settlement, 13 (2), 323-340, doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idac012
  24. Legality of Use of Force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Belgium), ICJ Reports 2004.
  25. Milanovic, M. (2022). ICJ Indicates Provisional Measures against Russia, in a Near Total Win for Ukraine; Russia Expelled from the Council of Europe, at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/icj-indicates-provisional-measures-against-russia-in-a-near-total-win-for-ukraine-russia-expelled-from-the-council-of-europe/
  26. Oellers-Frahm, K. (2012). Article 94, in, Simma, Erasmus Khan, Nolte, Paulus, Wessendorf (eds), The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Vol. II (3rd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  27. Orakhelashvili, A. (2022). Anything Goes? The ICJ's Provisional Measures Order in Ukraine v. Russia, Birmangham Law School Research Blog, at: https://blog.bham.ac.uk/lawresearch/2022/03/anything-goes-the-icjs-provisional-measures-order-in-ukraine-v-russia/
  28. Public sitting held on Monday 7 March 2022, in the case concerning Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220307-ORA-01-00-BI.pdf
  29. Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, ICJ Reports 1951.
  30. Separate Opinion of Judge Robinson, 16 March 2022, at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/182/182-20220316-ORD-01-04-EN.pdf
  31. Simma, B. (1999). NATO, the UN and the Use of Force: Legal Aspects, European Journal of International Law, 10 (1), 1-22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/10.1.1
  32. Tanzi, A. (2019). Ultra Petita, Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Law, Online Version, at: https://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law-mpeipro/e2239.013.2239/law-mpeipro-e2239
  33. Zyberi, G. (2010). Provisional Measures of the International Court of Justice in Armed Conflict Situations. Leiden Journal of International Law, 23 (3), 571–584. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156510000221 
  34. Weatherall, T. (2015). Jus cogens: International Law and Social Contract, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.