Europe

Grand Chamber of the ECtHR Hears Climate Change Cases for the First Time

 By: Jamela Wharton

Journal of Global Rights and Organization, Associate Articles Editor

STRASBOURG, France – The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) located in Strasbourg France, has decided to host Grand Chamber hearings for three climate change lawsuits. The cases are Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland (Verein), Carême v. France (Carême), and Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Other States (Duarte). There were other climate change cases that did not reach this stage. Two were deemed inadmissible, and there are six others that have been adjourned.

Hikers look upon the Great Aletsch Glacier, the largest glacier in the Swiss Alps, which is said to be retreating due to global warning. Courtesy of Financial Times.

The Verein case was fast tracked which caused both hearings for the Carême and Verein cases to be held on March 29, 2023. Verein’s hearing was schedule in the morning, making it the first climate change case to be heard by the Grand Chamber of the EctHR. The Grand Chamber hearings are the last step before a judgment is rendered. The hearing for Duarte Agostinho and Others v. Portugal and 32 Other States does not have a hearing date yet, but it is expected to occur after the court’s 2023 summer recess.

The plaintiffs in all the climate change cases have asserted that their article two right to life of the European Convention on Human Rights has been violated. Verein argues that the Switzerland government failed to adequately mitigate the effects of climate change. The plaintiffs of this case are older members of the community who are concerned of the effects climate change may have on their living conditions and health. In Carême, the former mayor of a municipality in France contends that France has not taken the necessary steps to prevent the climate change crisis, and this failure amounts to a violation of the Convention. Duarte was brought against 33 member states for their role in greenhouse emissions. The applicants are made up of Portuguese nationals between the ages of 10 to 23. They claim the emissions cause a threat to their living conditions and health and is a violation of their right to life.

The decision is expected to determine whether a member state’s governmental inaction to mitigate climate change is a violation of human rights law. This decision would set a binding precedent to all member states.

 

For further information, please see:

ECtHR- Factsheet on Climate Change Cases Pending Before the Grand Chamber of the Court- Mar. 2023.

Greenpeace- First Climate Case Heard of the European Court of Human Rights – 29 Mar. 2023

Despite Newly Passed Avenues for Support to the ICC, the Biden Administration and Pentagon are at Odds in Determining Which Documents to Provide the ICC regarding Putin’s Actions in Ukraine

By: Patrick Farrell

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – As previously reported by Impunity Watch News, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin’s arrest due to his role in the atrocities perpetrated during Russia’s war in Ukraine. The public issuing of the warrant was heralded as a significant step for two major reasons. First, in deterring further crimes in Ukraine, and second, widespread support for the indictment has been characterized as a win for the basic principles of humanity. Yet, the Kremlin has directly condemned the ICC’s actions, labeling them as “outrageous and unacceptable” and even rejected the warrant. Given this response, the ICC is now in need of support for the investigation and eventual prosecution. With that said, the Biden Administration is currently at odds with the Department of Defense in determining the nature of the evidence that the United States will share with the ICC regarding Russian atrocities in Ukraine.

The International Criminal Court. Photo courtesy of Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York Times

Following a National Security Council cabinet-level principals committee meeting on Feb. 3, President Biden has yet to make a decision to resolve the dispute. Although President Clinton signed the Rome Statute in 2000, he never sent it to the Senate for ratification, thus leaving the United States as a non-party to the Treaty. Further, in 1999 and 2002, Congress enacted laws that limited the support that the government could provide the ICC. However, following the bipartisan push to hold Putin accountable, Congress returned to the question of whether to help the ICC. Pursuant to regulations passed by Congress in December 2022, exceptions now exist that allow the U.S. Government to assist with “investigations and prosecutions of foreign nationals related to the situation in Ukraine.” These new laws, including the Consolidated Appropriations Act, the Justice for Victims of War Crimes Act, and the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act contain new elements highlighting the importance attached to supporting accountability for those responsible for atrocities such as these. Most importantly, the amendments in the Consolidated Appropriations Act allow the United States to provide assistance to the ICC Prosecutor’s efforts in Ukraine, even regardless of whether accusations have been made.

Despite these new powers, the Pentagon has maintained the position that the United States should remain separate from the ICC and that the Court should undertake its own investigation, especially since neither the United States nor Russia are parties to the Rome Statute.

Even amidst these internal tensions, national security experts and other government officials see an opportunity in using the ICC as a tool for enforcing accountability. According to John Bellinger, a lawyer for the National Security Council, the U.S. can assist in investigating and prosecuting war crimes by assisting the ICC, which is the successor to the Nuremberg tribunals. In addition, both Senator Lindsey Graham and Attorney General Merrick Garland have reiterated their commitment to helping Ukrainian prosecutors pursue Russian war crimes.

Even after modifications to longstanding legal restrictions which previously stifled America from aiding the ICC, a dispute now exists over whether the U.S. should provide such evidence. Still, it is hopeful that U.S. officials will come to a solution to assist the collaborative effort to bring justice for Russian atrocities committed in Ukraine.

For further information, please see:

Beatrice Nkansah, Impunity Watch News – ‘ICC’ Issues Warrants for Putin’s Arrest Regarding His Role in Russia’s War in Ukraine – 23 Mar. 2023

CNN – ICC issues war crimes arrest warrant for Putin for alleged deportation of Ukrainian children – 17 Mar. 2023

The New York Times – Pentagon Blocks Sharing Evidence of Possible Russian War Crimes With Hague Court – 8 Mar. 2023

Just Security – Unpacking New Legislation on US Support for the International Criminal Court – 9 Mar. 2023

‘ICC’ Issues Warrants for Putin’s Arrest Regarding His Role in Russia’s War in Ukraine

By: Beatrice Nkansah

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

THE HAUGE, Netherlands – The tensions between Ukraine and Russia, formerly known as the Soviet Union, have been brewing for the past 8-9 years. Almost two centuries ago, the Soviet Union gifted Crimea to the Soviet Republic of Ukraine. In 2014, Russia violated General Principles of International Law by unlawfully annexing Crimea – forcing those living in Crimea to flee from Russian force and persecution. As a result of the unlawful annexation of ethnic and religious Crimea and Ukraine individuals are facing widespread discrimination and destruction. As tension between the two sovereign countries began to build, Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 making significant advances until Ukrainian defending forces were able to launch counterattacks.

As a result of the growing tension and actions of Russia for the past decade, on March 17, 2023, the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s Pre-Trial Chamber II issued a warrant for the arrest of Russia’s president – Vladimir Putin and Russia’s Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights in Russia.

Vladimir Putin and Presidential Commissioner of Children’s Rights in Russia, Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova . Photo Courtesy of Sky News.

The basis for the arrest warrant is alleged violations of the Rome Statute. The Rome Statute gives the ICC the power to investigate and prosecute international crimes relating to the following: Genocide, Crimes of Aggresion, Crimes against Humanity, and War Crimes. The ICC is using the basis of Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute to assert their jurisdiction in issuing an arrest warrant for Putin on the basis of his individual responsibility and by holding him accountable for being a commanding superior to carry out the unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children as part of their war strategies. The ICC alleges that Putin violated two clauses of Article 8 of the Rome Statute pertaining to what constitutes a war crime including unlawful deportation, unlawful confinement, and taking of hostages.

There was great debate within the ICC as to keeping the warrants a secret or not, but they decided to ultimately go public, hoping that doing so would reduce and prevent further crimes. The ICC also chose to go public with the warrants as a signal that all who violate international law in Ukraine will be held responsible regardless of their political power or status. The expectation following this warrant is that if Putin or the Presidential Commissioner for Children’s rights in Russia leave Russia, they shall be arrested and brought forth to the ICC. It is currently uncertain if the ICC will pursue additional allegations as a multitude of crimes against humanity has been made since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Hopefully, justice will soon be brought to Ukraine.

 

For further information, please see:

Amnesty – Russia: ICC’s arrest warrant against Putin a step towards justice for victims of war crimes in Ukraine – 17 Mar. 2023

Council on Foreign Relations – Ukraine: Conflict at the Crossroads of Europe and Russia – 14 Feb. 2023

ICC – Rome Statute – 17 July 1998

ICC – Situation in Ukraine: ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova – 17 Mar. 2023

The Guardian – ICC judges issue arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin over alleged war crimes – 17 Mar. 2023

UK Government – Speech on Seventh anniversary of Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea: UK statement – 4 Mar. 2021

Sentence and Conviction of Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Signals Bealrus’ Efforts to Deter Human Rights Activists

By: Nathanael Linton

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

            On March 3, 2023, Ales Bialiatski, among other human rights activists, was sentenced by the Lieninski District Court of Minsk, under presiding Judge Maryna Zapasnik, to serve long-term prison terms. Mr. Bialiatski won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2022 for his “courageous work and dedication to promoting human rights and democracy in Belarus.” He founded the organization Viasna to “provide support to incarcerated demonstrators and their families” who opposed Belarus’ constitutional amendments made in 2016 to keep then-and-current President Alexander Lukashenko in power.

Ales Bialiatski in cage enclosure during trial. Photo courtesy of Viasna

Mr. Bialiatski is currently serving ten years for being found guilty of “smuggling by an organized group” under Part 4 Article 228 of the Criminal Code, and for “financing of group actions grossly violating the public order” under Part 2 of Article 342 of the Criminal Code. However, this is not his first time being sentenced by the Belarusian government. In 2011, he was sentenced to three years for alleged tax invasion, and again in 2021 for protesting current President Lukashenko’s administration for human rights violations committed by the Belarus government. To date, Mr. Bialiatski has been in Belarusian custody since July 14, 2021.

Human rights activists and opponents of the current Belarusian government have stated that the imprisonment of human rights activists is “politically motivated.” In his defense, Mr. Bialiatski argues that “the activities of Viasna has been completely legal and comply with all international obligations of the Republic of Belarus.” However, Judge Zapasnik has found the allegations against Bailiatski, as well as the other high-level leaders of Viasna organization, to be “fully proven.” During their detainment, Mr. Staradubets, a spokesperson for Viasna, states that the conditions in which Mr. Bialiatski and others are being kept should be considered “torture.” According to Staradubets, ‘We call [it] torture because

they’re being held for several months in a 19th-century building, poorly lit cells with no fresh air, no sunlight, poor food, [and] little to no healthcare.” However, when confronted with allegedly imprisoning activists as a form of oppression, Mr. Lukashenko simply argues that all government opponents, including Mr. Bialiatski, were incarcerated for breaking the law. The recent decision now sends him to a medium-security penal colony.

            The incarceration of Mr. Bialiatski though is not the first time Belarus makes headlines for its troubling human rights issues. According to the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Council of Europe, Belarus made headlines after their 2020 presidential elections in which “various peaceful protestors were arrested, and other individuals reported missing.” The right to life is being troubled by Belarus’ numerous deprivations of liberty. These individuals’ sacrifices should not be in vain, especially those of a Nobel Peace Prize laureate. In a country such as Belarus, whose actions have been condemned by various international bodies, work should be done to prosecute Belarus for its egregious and hostile actions toward workers of human rights. Our thoughts and prayers are with Mr. Bialiatski, his family, and all other human rights activists who still fight for justice despite their current conditions.

 

For further information, please see:

BBC News – Ales Bialiatski: Nobel Prize-winning activist sentenced to 10 years in jail – 3 Mar. 2023

Council of Europe, Commissioner of Human Rights – Press Statement: Belarus: today’s conviction of Nobel Laureate Bialiatski and other human rights defenders is a blatant attack against justice – 3 Mar. 2023

Council of Europe, Commissioner of Human Rights – Press Statement: Human rights violations in Belarus must stop immediately – 21 Sept. 2020

PBS News – Belarusian court sentences Nobel laureate Bialiatski to 10 years in prison – 3 Mar. 2023.

U.N. Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights – Press Statement: Sentencing of Human Rights defenders in Belarus – 3 Mar. 2023

Viasna – Viasna leadership receives from 7 to 10 years in jail – 3 Mar. 2023

Wall Street Journal – Nobel Laureate and Activist Ales Bialiatski Sentenced to 10 Years in Belarusian Prison – 3 Mar. 2023

ECHR to Hear Case Regarding Allegations Against Russia of Human Rights Violations Pertaining to MH-17 Aircraft Crash

By: Kaylee Searcy

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

 AMSTERDAM, Netherlands – On January 25, 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) announced that a complaint filed by the Netherlands and Ukraine regarding the downing of a Malaysian Airlines flight in 2014 would be “partially admissible.” The complaint met sufficient criteria and presented enough evidence to support many of the allegations and claims against Russia. Proceedings over the next two years will determine the case merits. Only then will the court issue a final ruling.

The verdict session for the case against Russia regarding the downing of flight MH-17. Photo courtesy of The New York Times.

On July 17, 2014, a Malaysian Airlines flight (MH17) was shot down by a surface-to-air missile. With 283 passengers and 15 crew members, the passenger jet was transiting from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. All 298 individuals perished in eastern Ukraine when the plane was hit. At the time, it was the largest loss of civilian life in the intensifying Russia/Ukraine conflict. 196 people on the plane were Dutch, the remaining 102 were from various countries including Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.

Over eight years after the incident, in November 2022, a Netherlands court convicted three men for the crime and sentenced them to life in prison. All three individuals were found to have significant connections to Russian security forces and had obtained the Russian-made missile from the military. With a desire to hold the orchestrators of the attack accountable, the Netherlands filed a complaint in 2020 with the ECHR arguing Russia’s responsibility for the catastrophic loss of life on MH17. The complaint alleged Russia was involved in the downing of MH17 and failed to investigate or even cooperate with an ongoing investigation resulting in breaching numerous articles of the European Convention on Human Rights. The specific articles include violating Article 2, providing a right to life; violating Article 3, prohibiting torture and inhumane treatment; and violating Article 13, providing the right to an effective remedy. The court acknowledged the amount of time that had passed since the plane crashed and noted that it was in the interest of justice to allow time for “clarity” and “sufficiently credible and specific evidence” to be obtained by the Netherlands before filing.

The ECHR’s willingness to hear the case and imply that Russia may be held accountable has been well received. Anticipated ramifications of the case are largely figurative and political. As of September 2022, Russia is no longer a party to the European Convention on Human Rights. However, since the incident in question occurred prior to the date Russia removed itself as a signatory, the court retains the right to investigate claims against the state. Russia continues to deny any involvement in the incident.

Further confirming the significance of this case are the 7,000 individual cases of Russian aggression in Ukraine pending before the court, hoping to be heard. In an effort to demonstrate that Russia cannot “escape the long arm of international law,” this is one monumental step in the direction of justice and culpability for the MH17.

 

For further information, please see:

ECHR – Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms  

ECHR- Press Release: Eastern Ukraine and flight MH17 case declared partly admissible – 25 Jan. 2023

ECHR – Press Release: New inter-State application brought by Netherlands against Russia concerning downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 – 15 July 2020  

Government of the Netherlands – Flight MH17: European Court to hand down decision on admissibility of the Netherlands’ inter-state application against Russia – 23 Jan. 2023

NYT – Dutch Court Convicts 3 of Murder for 2014 Downing of Airliner in Ukraine – November 17, 2022

NYT – The Netherlands Brings Russia to Court Over the Downing of MH17 – 23 Sept. 2020

NZ Herald – Russia-Ukraine war, Flight MH17: European court rules cases admissible, downed Malaysia Airlines plane included – 25 Jan. 2023

Reuters – European rights court rules Ukraine, MH-17 cases against Russia are admissible – 25 Jan. 2023

Simple Flying – Simple Flying, European Court of Human Rights Says Yes to Dutch Case Against Russia over MH17 – 25 Jan. 2023