An Arrest Warrant for Vladimir Putin

17th March 2023

Today an arrest warrant was issued for the arrest of Vladimir Putin.

This warrant was issued by the International Criminal Court.

On the face of it, the jurisdiction of that court in this matter is not obvious.

Neither Russia nor Ukraine are signatories to the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court and provides for the jurisdiction of the court.

(And nor are, for example, the United States and Israel.)

But it seems that not being a signatory is not a barrier.

According to the court’s site, “Ukraine is not a State Party to the Rome Statute, but it has twice exercised its prerogatives to accept the Court’s jurisdiction over alleged crimes under the Rome Statute occurring on its territory, pursuant to article 12(3) of the Statute”.

It would appear that a mere declaration – as distinct from signing, let alone ratifying, the Rome Statute – is enough to confer jurisdiction.

Article 12 of the Rome Statute provides:

One can see how this joins the legal dots so that there is jurisdiction for a warrant to be issued.

Somewhere there is, no doubt, a paper copy of Article 12(3) with a big tick next to it.

But this, of course, will not be enough for the Russians to cooperate.

There is currently zero chance of Putin being arrested.

This should not surprise us.

For, unlike equity, international law often acts in vain.

In large part, that is the point of international law – to provide international standards even if those standards are not met

And the politics in Russia can change.

*

By coincidence, the last week also saw the 103rd birthday of the last surviving Nuremberg prosecutor, Ben Ferencz.

Ben Ferencz (@BenFerencz), the last surviving prosecutor from the Nuremberg trials, is 103 today: https://t.co/5o06m4tges

— Mr Memory (@AmIRightSir) March 11, 2023

One of the convictions secured by Ferencz was for an SS officer responsible for mass murders in Ukraine.

That mass murderer was hanged.

All Putin would face is imprisonment.

*

The basis for the warrant for Putin is the forced deportation of Ukraine children.

This is a serious matter – but it is, of course, not the only war crime for which Putin is responsible.

It is, however, one of the easiest to evidence – and, indeed, it would appear the facts of the deportations are not disputed.

As such it has a flavour of Al Capone and tax evasion – a prosecution that is evidence-led and thereby more likely to reach a more advanced stage procedurally.

Presumably an arrest warrant needs a sound evidential base, and the forced deportation of Ukraine children provides the requisite evidence.

This certainly not to underplay the importance of the child deportation issue – it is more of an illustration that any practical prosecution will always be a balance between law and evidence.

Perhaps further grounds can be added in due course.

But if this prosecution has any chance of success, then at this early stage doing-it-by-the-evidence as well as doing-it-by-the book is prudent and admirable.

This prosecution may not get any further – but, if it does, it will be in part because the prosecution was properly thought-through at its early stages.

***

Comments Policy

This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.

Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome, or if they risk derailing the discussion.

More on the comments policy is here.