/ world today news/ On March 20, three days after the International Criminal Court (ICC) announced the issuance of an arrest warrant for the President of the Russian Federation, important decisions followed. The Russian Investigative Committee opened a criminal case against the ICC prosecutor and the three judges who signed the order.
The message of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation states that these actions are clearly illegal, as there are no grounds for criminal liability. It should be noted that this is a rather soft qualification of the actions of these individuals. The main reason for the deliberate illegality of the actions of the ICC judges is the flagrant lack of jurisdiction of this court.
It is interesting to note that both Russian legislation and norms of international law became legal grounds for criminal proceedings. Thus, the Criminal Code of Russia contains a whole chapter called “Crimes against justice”. In the actions of the prosecutor of the ICC, there are signs of acts under Articles 299 and 360. Here they are:
Article 299 (part 3): Bringing a knowingly innocent person to criminal responsibility, combined with an accusation of committing a serious or particularly serious crime or causing great damage or other serious consequences, is punishable by imprisonment for a term of five to ten years.
Article 360 (part 2): Attack on a representative of a foreign state or an official of an international organization enjoying international protection, as well as the office or residential premises or vehicles of persons enjoying international protection … committed with the purpose of provoking of war or complicating international relations, is punishable by imprisonment for five to ten years.
The crimes of the prosecutor and ICC judges have two sides: an already committed part and a preparatory part. But here, too, the position of the Investigative Committee is impeccable: although the criminal legislation of Russia does not provide for criminal responsibility for the preparation of any crime, such responsibility is provided for in the case of a serious and especially serious crime (Article 30, Part 2 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation). These crimes fall into this category.
This is the national legislation of Russia. The actions of the Investigative Committee, however, also have an international legal basis. This is the Convention (1973) on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Persons Benefiting from International Protection. Every head of state, according to Article 1 of this convention, falls under the definition “internationally protected person”.
However, you should pay attention to the fact that SK forgot about one more character. This is the president of the ICC, Hofmanski, who announced the decision of the preliminary panel, who issued the arrest warrant. Hoffmannski did not sign the order, but with his speech he wanted to achieve two goals.
First, to legitimize the decision of the three judges. In a situation where three persons committed clearly illegal actions, the head of the authority should have imposed disciplinary sanctions on them. Instead, however, he declared the decision of the three to be the decision of the entire court. Hoffmannski is a participant in a criminal act and should also be made a criminal defendant, at least as an accomplice.
There is also the question of an arrest warrant for the cloaked criminals. Violations of articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are gross. The charge of incitement to attack an agent of a foreign state is challenging and does not require lengthy investigation.
Arrest warrants should thus be immediately issued for these participants in joint criminal acts. This is necessary so that Russia can request their extradition or the execution of an arrest warrant if the prosecutor or judges are located on the territory of those countries that have extradition treaties with Russia.
According to the Statute of the ICC, prosecutors and judges enjoy immunity. However, Russia has not ratified the ICC Statute and its provisions are not binding on it. Thus, neither the prosecutor nor the ICC judges can invoke their immunity based on a document that has no legal force in Russia. The same applies to other countries that are not parties to the ICC Statute. And there are seventy such countries.
The terms of punishment for the prosecutor and ICC judges under both Article 299 and Article 360 are 5 to 10 years in prison. Russian legislation is more humane than the “law” of the International Criminal Court, where judges can appoint … any terms of imprisonment! They are not subject to any conditions!
In his Telegram channel, Deputy – The Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation D.A. Medvedev hinted that the trial could become a military target. The statement is harsh, but there is a basis for it. Remember that in 1999 NATO planes bombed the Yugoslav TV building, saying it was “military objective’.
Their explanation was as follows: they say that on television they do not hear gratitude for the bombs, but anti-NATO propaganda, which means that the civilian object has turned into a military one. And that, they argued, in turn made it a legitimate military target. Such an argument was quite seriously presented at the trial at the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in the same Hague.
And he was then accepted by the acting prosecutor of this court. Perhaps we should use this legal argument against those who invented it? Having committed a legal crime, the ICC becomes a direct participant in NATO’s new war (1) against Russia and thus loses civilian status. With all the resulting consequences.
By the way, for now, Russia works exclusively in the field of law. The actions of the ICC are in fact a gross violation of international law. Our response is strictly legal. But despite the extremely (even categorically) legally correct answer, it is important to realize that the long legal war is over.
On March 17, 2023 The West took a fundamentally new action – outlawed Russia. The personification of the arrest warrant should not mislead anyone – we are talking about outlawing Russia as a sovereign state.
––––––––––––––
(1) Please note that both the Prosecutor of the ICC, the President of the Trial Chamber and the President of the ICC are citizens of NATO countries.
Translation: EU
Vote with ballot No. 14 for the LEFT and specifically for 11 MIR Lovech with leader of the list Rumen Valov Petkov – doctor of philosophy, editor-in-chief of ‘Pogled.Info’ and in 25 MIR-Sofia with preferential No. 105. Tell your friends in Lovech and Sofia who to support!?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel or in Telegram:
#criminal #cases #judges #ICC #criminals #court #robes
**How might Russia’s argument regarding the ICC’s lack of jurisdiction resonate with other countries that have historically been wary of the court’s reach?**
## Interview: A Legal Perspective on the ICC Arrest Warrant for Russian President
**Introduction:**
Welcome to World Today News. Today, we’ll be discussing the recent arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for Russian President Vladimir Putin and the subsequent response by the Russian government. Joining us today are two experts:
* **Dr. Natalia Petrova**: A renowned international law scholar specializing in international criminal tribunals.
* **Mr. Sergei Ivanov**: A former diplomat with extensive experience in Russian-Western relations.
Let’s dive right in.
**Section 1: Jurisdiction and Legality of the Arrest Warrant**
* **Question for Dr. Petrova:** The Russian Investigative Committee argues that the ICC lacks jurisdiction in this case. Can you explain the basis of this argument and how it aligns with international law?
* **Question for Mr. Ivanov:**
Do you believe the ICC’s decision will have any lasting impact on future Russian-West relations? Will this further intensify existing tensions?
**Section 2: Russia’s Countermeasures: Criminal Proceedings against the ICC Prosecutor and Judges**
* **Question for Dr. Petrova:** Russia has launched criminal proceedings against the ICC prosecutor and judges. What is your assessment of the legal basis for these proceedings under both Russian and international law? Are Russia’s actions unprecedented, and if so, what precedents, if any, could they set?
* **Question for Mr. Ivanov:** How likely is it that Russia will succeed in extraditing the ICC officials? What are the potential diplomatic consequences of such a move?
**Section 3:
The Broader Implications for International Justice and War Crimes Prosecution**
* **Question for Dr. Petrova:** What are the potential ramifications of this case for the ICC’s authority and its ability to effectively prosecute war crimes in the future?
* **Question for Mr. Ivanov:** Based on your experience, how can the international community best navigate these complex geopolitical tensions while still ensuring accountability for potential war crimes?
**Closing Remarks:**
* **Final thought from Dr. Petrova**: What is the most crucial takeaway from this case concerning the balance between national sovereignty and international justice?
* **Final thought from Mr. Ivanov**: What does the future hold for international relations in light of these developments? Can dialogue and diplomacy still bridge the divide?
This interview format encourages nuanced discussion on a highly sensitive topic, incorporating diverse viewpoints from legal and diplomatic perspectives. By asking open-ended questions, the interview aims to stimulate thoughtful dialogue and illuminate the multifaceted complexities surrounding the ICC arrest warrant and its broader implications for international law and geopolitics.
