Russia must suspend military operations in Ukraine: International Court of Justice interim order

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague, Netherlands on Wednesday passed a provisional measure directing the Russian Federation to suspend military operations in the territory of Ukraine [Ukraine v Russian Federation]..It was also unanimously indicated that both Russia and Ukraine should refrain from any action that may aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court, or make it more difficult to resolve. The provisional measure was passed by 13 votes against 2. Indian judge at ICJ Justice Dalveer Bhandari voted in favour of the provisional measure..The Court further indicated that any military or irregular armed units which may be directed or supported by Russia, as well as any organizations and persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence, take no steps in furtherance of the military operations. .The Court, however, refused to indicate the Russian Federation to provide a report to the Court on measures taken to implement the Court’s order on provisional measures, as sought by Ukraine. .The Court emphasised that a State, in discharging its duty to prevent genocide, could act only within the limits of international law, and the acts taken by contracting parties to prevent and punish genocide must be in conformity with the spirit of the United Nations. Noting that there was not enough evidence substantiating the allegations of the Russian government that genocide was committed on Ukrainian territory, it was found that Ukraine had a plausible right not to be subjected to military operations by the Russian federation for the purpose of preventing an alleged genocide. .The Court also expressed its regret at the decision of the Russian Federation to not participate in the oral proceedings before the ICJ. "The non-appearance of a party has a negative impact on the sound administration of justice as it deprives the Court of assistance a party could have provided to it," the Court said..It was stated that at the present stage the Court was not required to ascertain whether any violation of obligations under the Genocide Convention had occurred in the dispute. "Such a finding could be made by the Court only at the stage of examination of the merits of the present case," it was stated.With this, the Court took a view that the acts complained of by the applicant appeared to be capable of falling within the Genocide Convention. Thus, it prima facie had jurisdiction to entertain the case and could not accede to the Russian Federation's request that the case be removed from the general list for manifest lack of jurisdiction. .The ICJ heard on 7 March, Ukraine's application seeking a declaration that the claims of genocide as alleged by Russia within Ukrainian oblasts (areas) of Luhansk and Donetsk are false. Russia had defended its military action on this ground. Ukraine also sought reparations for damages caused by Russian military action..[Ukraine v Russia] If ICJ does not act now, this will not be last instance of aggression from Putin: Ukraine argues.The ICJ was called upon to urgently indicate provisional measures in light of the situation in Ukraine and the irreparable harm that may be caused to the country and its citizens in the wake of Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion of his neighbouring country..As provisional measures, Ukraine had sought directions to be issued to Russian to immediately suspend all military operations.a. The Russian Federation shall immediately suspend the military operations commenced on 24 February 2022 that have as their stated purpose and objective the prevention and punishment of a claimed genocide in the Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts of Ukraine.b. The Russian Federation shall immediately ensure that any military or irregular armed units which may be directed or supported by it, as well as any organizations and persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence, take no steps in furtherance of the military operations which have as their stated purpose and objective preventing or punishing Ukraine for committing genocide.c. The Russian Federation shall refrain from any action and shall provide assurances that no action is taken that may aggravate or extend the dispute that is the subject of this Application, or render this dispute more difficult to resolve.d. The Russian Federation shall provide a report to the Court on measures taken to implement the Court’s Order on Provisional Measures one week after such Order and then on a regular basis to be fixed by the Court..While the Court headed by President Joan E Donoghue heard arguments by counsel and representatives of Ukraine, Russia's absence at the hearing was conspicuous. Russian Ambassador to The Hague Alexander Shulgin indicated that his government did not intend to participate in the proceedings..· Russia would have the world believe that Ukraine launched a war against its own people in Donbass. These are false claims of genocide made by Russia;· Russia was desperate to manufacture a casus belli (cause for war). President Vladimir Putin recognised Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic, laid the groundwork for ongoing war;· Russia is invoking provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide as a legal shield to perpetuate atrocities in Ukraine;· Ukraine demands good faith implementation of the Genocide Convention. Russia has a duty not to act to prevent genocide, simply because no genocide exists;· Russian forces are targeting civilians in Ukraine; urgent situation requires the passing of provisional measures;· Mariupol continues to live without water, electricity and heating as the result of the constant shelling. Today it is Mariupol; tomorrow it could be Kharkiv or Kiev;· Russia's actions also have an environmental impact of Ukraine and neighbouring countries. A full scale military operation implies irreversible environmental harm;· There is no doubt that unless this Court acts now, irreparable prejudice will be caused to the Ukrainian people until the Court gives it final decision;· Neighbouring countries may be destabilised as a result of the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine. The harms already suffered by the Ukrainian people will recur and intensify until Russia has reached its goal, whatever that may be;· All three prerequisites for the indication of provisional measures are fulfilled;· Whether or not Russia chooses to appear in these proceedings, it should be obligated to follow the measures indicated by the Court;· The tragedy being witnessed in the cities of Ukraine was precisely what our modern international legal system was designed to prevent..The Court had said that it would pass an order on the question of provisional measures expeditiously, after hearing lawyers and representatives who made arguments for Ukraine.US-based firm Covington & Burling LLP represented the Ukraine government. Partners David Zionts, Marney Cheek and Jonathan Gimblett made arguments, along with Professor of International Law at Yale Law University Harold Hongju Koh..Although, time was initially allotted for Russia to make its counter submissions, Russia made it clear that it would take no part in the proceedings. Questions also arose whether Putin would take steps to implement the Court's order on provisional measures. In such a case, Ukraine may bring the matter before the Security Council, which is empowered to recommend or decide upon measures to be taken to give effect to the judgment..[Read Judgment]