Special Features

International Community Calls for a New Court to Prosecute the Crime of Aggression

Zoé Tkaczyk

Impunity Watch News Guest Writer

 

Shortly after Russia launched its unlawful, full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, many began advocating for a new tribunal to prosecute Russian leadership for the crime of aggression. With 30 core states discussing the creation of a new adjudicative body, proponents are pushing for a way to address Russia’s breach of the international order and create deterrence in the future. 

 
A woman mourns at her son’s grave after he died fighting in the war on Ukrainian Independence Day in Kharkiv, Ukraine. Courtesy of Bram Janssen and Associated Press.
  

First recognized by the International Tribunal at Nuremberg, the crime of aggression, as defined by Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, prohibits the use of force, barring narrow exceptions. It imposes criminal liability on those in violation. Largely dormant throughout the Cold War, the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Rome Statute sought to bring the crime under its jurisdiction but controversy at the time has left both the definition and activation apparently in limbo. Even with the additional Kampala amendments created in 2018 after the atrocities in Uganda, the grey zone remains. This has led many to call for a separate tribunal, akin to the one established at Nuremberg, to handle aggression cases stemming from the Russo-Ukrainian War. Beyond WWII, cases prosecuting aggression are scant. The UN Security Council set up courts to try the perpetrators of atrocities in Yugoslavia and Rwanda in the 90’s but with Russia as a permanent member, this is not a viable option. 

Further bolstering their demands, the Rome Statute has a major loophole: only parties to the Rome Statute fall under ICC jurisdiction. This means Russia, a non-party, cannot be tried by the Court currently. Additionally, domestic courts afford many members of The Russian Troika, including Putin, immunity. Coupled with the lack of precedent for prosecuting this crime generally, the ad hoc tribunal is becoming more compelling. 

Three major legal solutions have emerged. The first is a multilateral treaty between Ukraine and willing states, similar to the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. The second is a Ukraine-UN tribunal created via resolution. The last is a domestic-international hybrid chamber based in Ukraine. The first two circumvent the troika prosecution problem, and the deputy head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office has rejected the third option as unconstitutional. Many are opposed to a tribunal that would present the crime of aggression as something bilateral, between Ukraine and Russia alone, but much of this hinges on the level of international participation.

Because the crime of aggression carries a unique gravity, many are advocating for a clearly defined and replicable solution to serve a deterrent effect. In the meantime, many efforts to gather and preserve evidence of aggression are ongoing. EU member states have already agreed to support establishing a Centre for Prosecution in the Hague with American endorsement. This staggered approach has come with benefits already. As “the mother of all crimes”, whatever option the world chooses will likely become precedent in the future, further complicating the matter. As worries of selective justice and tribunal legitimacy continue, how to prosecute the crime of aggression is a legal question we may finally get an answer to; however, it will also be impossible to separate these two nations’ complex, centuries-long history without prosecution, definition, and resolution. As accountability efforts continue, Ukraine must determine which normative expectations it seeks to abide by and consider negotiating the Rome Statute and Kampala Amendments or developing a tribunal system prepared to adjudicate over the troika.

 

Note: This article is one of a seven-part series exploring the Russo-Ukrainian War. Zoé Tkaczyk is a J.D./MAIR candidate (May 2025) at the Syracuse University College of Law and Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. This article series was inspired by sessions from the Carnegie-Maxwell Policy Planning Lab Fellowship: Postwar: Europe, Ukraine and the Future of European Order. Special thanks to Cora True-Frost and Alexa Connaughton for their guidance, feedback, and edits.

 

Just Security – Prosecuting the Crime of Aggression in Ukraine and Beyond: Seizing Opportunities, Confronting Challenges and Avoiding False Dilemmas – 2 April 2024

International Crisis Group – A New Court to Prosecute Russia’s Illegal War? – 29 March 2023



Supreme Court of New Zealand Rules that Individuals Have Standing to Bring Climate Actions

By: Suzan Elzawahry

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

WELLINGTON, New Zealand – On February 7th, 2024, the Supreme Court of New Zealand unanimously reversed a Court of Appeals decision that denied standing to a private citizen attempting to bring a tort action against New Zealand’s biggest carbon emitters. As a result, individuals in New Zealand now have standing to bring tort claims based on carbon emissions and potentially broader claims of man-made climate change. New Zealand may become the first common law jurisdiction to issue damages for a climate tort. If other jurisdictions follow suit, legal protections surrounding the right to life and freedom of belief may be significantly expanded. 

 
Power lines running through beautiful New Zealand landscapes. | Photo courtesy of Stewart Watson, Getty Images.
  

Plaintiff, Michael John Smith, is a Maori elder and the climate change spokesperson for his tribe. Initial pleadings stated that the release of greenhouse gas emissions by seven corporations in New Zealand (who made up one third of the country’s total greenhouse gas producers) risked adverse effects upon humankind and irreparable damage to the Maori’s customary and cultural interest in land. The claims were for negligence, tort of nuisance, and a novel claim of the tort of climate damage. 

The Court of Appeals struck down all three claims, stating that they did not amount to a reasonably arguable cause of action. In American Jurisprudence, this is equivalent to granting summary judgement to the defendant for the plaintiff’s failure to state a claim. 

The Supreme Court unanimously reversed this decision and reinstated Smith’s claim, reasoning that, procedurally, the Court is required to assume that the consequence of Defendant’s carbon emissions is Plaintiff’s harm and that it is the job of the trial court to hear further evidence. 

Most notably, the Court paid particular attention to the fact that Mr. Smith’s claim is partially tikanga based. Tikanga is the principle of a genealogical and kinship-based connection to land, fresh water, and sea possessed by the Maori people. Mr. Smith alleges tikanga can form the basis of a tort because an injury to the land is also an injury to himself and his descendants; he argues that the respondent’s actions are the cause of injury to his cultural, spiritual, and nutritional connection to the environment. In their analysis, the Court accepted this argument and expressly recognized the importance of allowing tikanga to inform New Zealand’s body of common law. In recognizing the importance of tikanga and extending legal protections based on it, the Court took a major step towards protecting the freedom of belief. 

Whether Mr. Smith will prevail in his tort claim is something only time will tell. However, the fact that a private citizen now has standing to sue major carbon emitters for tortious conduct is an astounding leap forward in expanding legal protection of the right to life. As carbon emissions continue to unfavorably impact global climates and human life, individuals may begin to find reprieve in their local courts. 

For further information, please see:

Climate Case Chart – Smith v Fonterra – 12 Apr. 2024 

NZSC – Smith v. Fonterra Co-Operative Group – 2024 

Supreme Court of New Zealand – Media Release Michael John Smith v Fonterra Co-Operative Group Limited and Others – 7 Feb. 2024

 

 

 

Historic Election in Senegal Sees Youngest President in Country’s History

By: D’Andre Gordon

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

Dakar, Senegal — In a historic turn of events, Senegal welcomed Bassirou Diomaye Faye as its newly inaugurated president, marking a significant transition from incarceration to leadership. This remarkable journey from the confines of a prison cell to the presidential palace underscores a profound narrative of resistance and democratic revival, highlighted in recent reports from AP News​​. Faye is the youngest president in Senegalese history. 

 
President Faye speaking before a crowd during his inauguration. | Photo Courtesy of AP News.
  

Faye’s ascent to the presidency is emblematic of a broader struggle against systemic injustices and the remnants of colonial exploitation. Released from prison alongside Ousmane Sonko, his mentor and a prominent opposition figure, just before the elections, Faye’s victory is a testament to the unyielding spirit of the Senegalese people and their quest for genuine democratic governance.

Faye’s commitment to eradicating corruption and ensuring equitable management of Senegal’s resources resonates with the aspirations of the youth, who have long been disillusioned by rampant unemployment and the neocolonial dynamics that have perpetuated economic disparities. His election represents a rejection of exploitative practices and a collective yearning for a governance model that prioritizes the welfare of its citizens over foreign interests, as detailed in the AP News report​​.

Echoing the themes of transparency and accountability, Faye’s decision to publicly declare his assets prior to the election serves as a powerful statement against the opaqueness that has marred political institutions. It is a step towards dismantling the structures of power that have historically marginalized the voices of the ordinary citizen in favor of a privileged few, reflecting a call for greater integrity in governance​​.

As Faye assumes Office, the composition of his government will be scrutinized as a reflection of his commitment to breaking with past practices and embodying the change that the Senegalese electorate has ardently yearned for. The challenges ahead are manifold, but the message is clear: the era of impunity and governance that serves the interests of a select few is over.

This momentous occasion in Senegal’s political landscape is not merely about a change in leadership but a profound shift towards a future where governance is characterized by integrity, inclusivity, and respect for the sovereign will of the people. It is a beacon of hope for not just Senegal, but for nations across the continent and beyond, grappling with the vestiges of imperialism and striving for a democratic ethos that truly reflects the aspirations of its people.

Senegal’s story, with Faye at the helm, offers a blueprint for a new kind of leadership – one that is rooted in the principles of justice, equity, and the unwavering belief in the power of the people to chart their own destiny. It is a clarion call for an era of governance that transcends the shadow of colonial legacies and paves the way for a future where every citizen has a stake in their nation’s prosperity, inspired by the details shared in the AP News article.

For further information, please see:

AP News – Senegal Swears in Former Opposition Figure, Recently Freed from Prison, as New President – Apr. 2, 2024

AP News – Senegal’s President-Elect Pledges to Fight Corruption After a Stunning Victory for the 44-Year-Old – Mar. 26, 2024

The Guardian – Bassirou Diomaye Faye sworn in as Senegal’s youngest president – Apr. 2, 2024

Greece Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

By: Neha Chhablani

Visiting Impunity Watch News Writer

ATHENS, Greece – On February 15, 2024, the Greek parliament passed a landmark bill legalizing same-sex marriage and equal parental rights for same-sex couples. Despite strong opposition from the country’s Orthodox Church, 176 out of 300 Members of Parliament (MPs) voted in favor of the bill. Greece is the first Orthodox Christian country to adopt such legislation, marking a step forward for the LGBTQ+ community in Greece and beyond.

 
LGBTQ+ activists holding a Pride flag outside the Greek Parliament during the 2023 Athens Pride Parade | Photo courtesy of NPR.
  

Greece’s new bill, which allows same-sex parents to claim legal guardianship of their children and legalizes civil same-sex marriage, was proposed by Greece’s Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis. He cited the bill as reflective of the country’s new progressive and democratic identity.

Greece has been moving towards more inclusive LGBTQ+ policies for almost a decade. It has allowed civil same-sex unions since 2015, granted legal recognition of gender identity in 2017, and banned conversion therapy in 2022. However, this recent bill faced significant pushback from various quarters, with some parties vehemently opposed to the law while others criticized it for not being progressive enough.

The primary opposition to the bill came from Greece’s Orthodox Church, which views homosexuality as a sin. Additionally, far-right parties labeled the bill as “anti-Christian,” arguing that it conflicted with Greece’s national interests.

On the other hand, LGBTQ+ activists noted the bill’s failure to recognize gender identities beyond the binary and shortcomings in facilitating access to reproductive technology for same-sex couples. Syriza, a left-wing party, further critiqued the bill for not granting same-sex couples the ability to become parents through surrogacy.

Despite criticism from both ends of the political spectrum, the bill passed due to substantial backing by 4 left-wing parties (including Syriza, despite its reservations) and rare cross-party unity. With 74 MPs voting against, 2 abstaining, and 46 absent during the vote, the bill easily secured a simple majority.

In passing its marriage equality bill, Greece became the 16th country in the European Union and the 35th country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage. Despina Paraskeva, Amnesty International Greece’s Campaign Coordinator, highlighted the bill’s significance, stating “this law represents an important milestone in the fight against homophobia and transphobia and a hard-won victory for those who have led that fight. It gives same-sex couples and their children the visibility and rights that they have long been denied.”

As anti-LGBTQ+ legislation continues to be passed in countries around the world, Greece’s growing recognition of LGBTQ+ rights and the importance of freedom of expression deserves celebration and sets an example of inclusive policy-making for nations to emulate. 

For further information, please see:

Aljazeera – Greece first Orthodox Christian country to legalise same-sex marriage – 16 Feb. 2024

Amnesty International – Greece: Same-sex marriage recognition, key milestone in fight against homophobia and transphobia – 16 Feb. 2024

NBC News – Greece legalizes same-sex marriage in a first for an Orthodox Christian nation – 15 Feb. 2024

NPR – Greece legalizes same-sex marriage despite church opposition – 15 Feb. 2024

NPR – In Greece, same-sex couples await a landmark parliamentary vote on marriage equality – 14 Feb. 2024

Reuters – Greece legalises same sex marriage in landmark change – Feb 16. 2024

 

 

 

European Parliament Passes Resolutions Addressing Human Rights Abuses in China, Sudan, and Tajikistan

By: Neha Chhablani

Visiting Impunity Watch News Writer

STRASBOURG, France – On January 18, 2024, the European Parliament adopted three resolutions regarding recent human rights violations in China, Sudan, and Tajikistan. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) condemned the repression of religious freedom in China, the ongoing conflict and resulting food insecurity in Sudan, and Tajikistan’s crackdown on independent media.

 
Members of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. | Photo courtesy of the European Federation of Journalists.
  

According to the European Parliament’s resolution, China has engaged in systematic persecution of the religious group Falun Gong since 1999. This includes frequent unwarranted detainment and reported exposure to psychological abuse, physical torture, and organ harvesting.

On May 12, 2023, Falun Gong practitioners Ding Yuande and his wife Ma Ruimei were arrested without a warrant. While Ma Ruimei was released on bail, Ding Yuande remained incarcerated for eight months before being sentenced to three years in prison. The European Parliament’s resolution called for the unconditional release of Ding Yuande and all wrongfully detained Falun Gong and the end of persecution of all religious minorities in China, including the Falun Gong, Uyghurs, and Tibetans. It implored EU member states to pursue punitive measures for entities contributing to religious repression in China. This included banishment from EU territories, imposing sanctions, refusing visas, freezing assets, and suspending extradition treaties.

Additionally, MEPs called for an immediate ceasefire between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan, as their conflict continues to be the primary driver of food insecurity and other human rights abuses in the country. In Sudan, over 5 million people suffer from emergency levels of hunger and 7.5 million are internally displaced. Recent increases in attacks on Sudan’s Masalit community have raised the risk of ethnic cleansing.

In its resolution, MEPs strongly deplored the continuous attacks on humanitarian workers and civilians and the use of sexual violence in the conflict. MEPs asked international actors contributing to the war to refrain from interference. The resolution then called on the UN to expand their arms embargo on Dafar to the rest of Iran due to the use of alleged Iranian-supplied weapons in the war.

Finally, the European Parliament adopted a resolution addressing the declining role of independent media in Tajikistan, stating that “Tajikistan’s media are in their worst state since independence in 1991.” In the last two years, Tajikistan’s authorities have incarcerated several journalists for reporting on human rights abuses in the country. The two primary independent media outlets regularly face threats by government authorities, while other independent media sources are consistently shut down.

The European Parliament condemned Tajikistan’s regulation of its media, including the closure of websites, persecution of journalists, and politically motivated sentencing of government critics, human rights activists, and independent lawyers. The resolution called for the fair treatment of the prisoners, investigations into the conditions of their detainment, release for those wrongfully detained, a safe environment for independent media outlets, increased international support for independent media sources in Tajikistan, and increased monitoring of media repression in Tajikistan by international organizations.

European Union citizens directly elect MEPs, so the Parliament represents the general opinion of EU Member States. All three resolutions passed by a majority vote, underscoring the EU’s continued commitment to protecting global human rights. The Parliament instructed its President to forward the resolutions to the other EU institutions.

For further information, please see:

Aljazeera – US claims seizure of Iranian weapons bound for Yemen’s Houthis – 16 Jan. 2024

European Commission Press Corner – Sudan: EU commits €190 million in additional humanitarian and development aid – 19 Jan. 2024

European Parliament – Tajikistan: state repression against the independent media – 18 Jan. 2024

European Parliament – The ongoing persecution of Falun Gong in China, notably the case of Mr Ding Yuande – 18 Jan. 2024

European Parliament – The threat of famine following the spread of conflict in Sudan – 18 Jan. 2024

European Parliament Press Room – Human rights breaches in China, Sudan and Tajikistan – 18 Jan. 2024

European Parliament – Welcome to the European Parliament – 3 Mar. 2024

NPR – In South Sudan, People Are Dying Of Hunger As Civil War Continues – 21 Feb. 2017