Abstract
This chapter focuses on the conflict in Eastern Ukraine from the international law perspective. It focuses on a design of the legal and political toolkit to be applied in the process of Donbas’ reintegration, which shall eventually lead to the final liquidation of the so-called “DPR” and “LPR” as “proto-states”, products of the Russian aggression. An analysis of the prospects of the restoration of the Ukrainian jurisdiction over seized territories zooms in on Russia’s accountability for supporting “rebels” in Eastern Ukraine, as well as a personal responsibility of the involved individuals. Based on the respective analysis, the chapter sets a proposal for a two-fold approach to reintegration efforts to be applied by Kyiv, combining post-conflict reconstruction (with the potential deployment of the UN peacekeeping mission), aimed at delivering justice in retributive and restorative dimensions, with the latter component emphasizing an accommodation of the regional diversity and the truth-telling practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
A valuable legal framework was established by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1998, regarding the legality of the possible secession of Quebec from the Canadian state. The Supreme Court in Ottawa held that in order to recognize the right to self-determination beyond the colonial sense, Quebec, as any other entity, would have to meet the requirements of three inter-related prerequisites: (1) people living in a such entity form a “nation”; (2) this nation is subjected to human rights violations and repressive policies by the de iure state; and (3) there is no other possible way to secure the rights of a “nation” than the creation of an independent state. DPR and LPR do not represent any other nation than Ukraine or Russia (which already possess their own states). Moreover, it cannot be proven that Ukraine has violated fundamental human rights of Donbas’s residents, especially in a structural or systematic way. Lastly, a military response and a subsequent creation of the de facto regime without Kyiv’s consent cannot be said to be the only possible way of “securing the rights” of people living in the Donets Basin.
- 2.
What is more, the Russian aggression contributed to consolidating Ukrainian society in spite of cultural differences (e.g. linguistic). For instance, the Ukrainian voluntary units on the front line comprised mostly Russophone Ukrainians (Riabchuk 2015, 138–156).
- 3.
Clearly, the annexation of Crimea constitutes an exception. It is noteworthy that in April 2019 the Kremlin offered a facilitated process for residents in the seized parts of Donbas to obtain Russian citizenship. Arguably, this might be seen as a step towards Russia’s ‘creeping annexation’ of Ukraine’s eastern regions.
- 4.
The question remains: “with whom?” The illegal entities of DPR/LPR? Such a presumption is definitely in line with the interests of the Kremlin, not Kyiv.
- 5.
The strongest speech of Volodymyr Zelenskyy about the Russian Federation seems to be the one he delivered at the 74th session of the UN General Assembly in September 2019, when he called out “Russian aggression” and “occupation of Ukrainian territories” by the Kremlin (President of Ukraine 2019).
- 6.
The ECtHR has associated itself with complaints concerning the events in Crimea. The same has been done with complaints regarding possible human rights violations in Donbas. One complaint was withdrawn by the Ukrainian authorities.
- 7.
The first, of February 25, 2014, was related to the “Maidan events” (already dropped by the ICC Prosecutor; ICC 2015, para. 95), while the second, from February 4, 2015, accepted the jurisdiction of the Hague-based Court over crimes against humanity and war crimes allegedly committed in Crimea and Donbas, starting from February 20, 2014 (with no closing date). The ICC Prosecutor decided to open a preliminary examination. Ukraine is still not a party to the Rome Statute, although this may change in coming years, at least according to debates in the Verkhovna Rada.
- 8.
As a result of the events in the Kerch Strait, the Ukrainian parliament approved a presidential decree to introduce martial law in ten oblasts of Ukraine for a period of 30 days lasting until December 26, 2018. In spite of the political discussions, experts underlined that the martial law was a useful instrument to enhance the combat readiness and mobility of the Ukrainian army in anticipation of a possible open attack by Russian forces (Tymchuk 2018).
- 9.
In the judgment of November 8, 2019, the ICJ determined its jurisdiction in the case and declared the Ukrainian application admissible (ICJ 2019).
- 10.
On June 10, 2015, Ukraine officially notified the Secretary General of the Council of Europe that due to the armed conflict in Donbas it was derogating from certain obligations coming from the ECHR. Kyiv took similar action with reference to obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on May 21, 2015. However, firstly, these derogations cannot be applied retrospectively, and, secondly, most of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the ECHR or the ICCPR, such as freedom from torture, are non-derogable rights (Milanović 2015).
- 11.
Moreover, the majority of people currently living in the self-proclaimed republics still define themselves as residents of Donets Basin with a mixed Russian–-Ukrainian ethnic and regional identity, just as was the case prior to the 2014 events (Sasse 2017).
- 12.
The “traditional,” but not necessarily correct, division of Ukrainians into Ukrainophones and Russophones, or the more Western-oriented west and pro-Russian east, are mostly outdated in the aftermath of the Russian aggression, as Riabchuk argues convincingly (2015, 139–140).
References
Amnesty International. 2014. Ukraine: Mounting Evidence of War Crimes and Russian Involvement. September 7, 2014. All websites cited in this article were accessed November 25, 2019. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2014/09/ukraine-mounting-evidence-war-crimes-and-russian-involvement/.
Arthur, Paige. 2009. How “Transitions” Reshaped Human Rights: A Conceptual History of Transitional Justice. Human Rights Quarterly 31 (2): 321–367.
Avakov, Arsen. 2018. Strategy of Restoration of the Integrity of Ukraine and De-occupation of the Donbas. Small Steps Mechanism. June 7, 2018. https://avakov.com/strategy-of-restoration-of-the-integrity-of-ukraine-and-de-occupation-of-the-donbass-small-steps-mechanism.html.
Bachmann, Klaus, and Igor Lyubashenko. 2017. The Puzzle of Transitional Justice in Ukraine. International Journal of Transitional Justice 11 (2): 297–314.
Bertelsen, Olga, ed. 2017. Revolution and War in Contemporary Ukraine. The Challenge of Change. In Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society 161, general ed. Andreas Umland. Stuttgart: Columbia University Press.
Bílková, Veronika. 2015. The Use of Force by the Russian Federation in Crimea. Heidelberg Journal of International Law 75: 27–50.
Boutros-Ghali, Boutros. 1992. An Agenda for Peace. New York: United Nations.
Bryant, Rebecca. 2014. Living with Liminality: De Facto States on the Threshold of the Global. The Brown Journal of World Affairs 20 (2): 125–143.
Buckheit, Lee C. 1978. Secession: The Legitimacy of Self-Determination. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Caspersen, Nina. 2013. Unrecognized States: The Struggle for Sovereignty in the Modern International System. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Cassese, Antonio. 2007. The Nicaragua and Tadić Tests Revisited in Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide in Bosnia. European Journal of International Law 18 (4): 649–668.
Centre for Research of Donbas Social Perspectives. 2018. Introduction of the International Provisional Administration in the Temporarily Occupied Territories of the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts as Part of a Peacekeeping Strategy for Ukraine. Kyiv.
Coyle, James J. 2018. Russia’s Border Wars and Frozen Conflicts. Palgrave Macmillan.
Czapliński, Władysław, Sławomir Dębski, Rafał Tarnogórski, and Karolina Wierczyńska. 2017. The Case of Crimea’s Annexation Under International Law. Warszawa: Scholar.
Dascalu, Diana. 2019. Frozen Conflicts and Federalization: Russian Policy in Transnistria and Donbas. Journal of International Affairs, May 22. https://jia.sipa.columbia.edu/online-articles/frozen-conflicts-and-federalization-russian-policy-transnistria-and-donbass.
Dawidowicz, Martin. 2010. The Obligation of Non-Recognition of an Unlawful Situation. In The Law of International Responsibility, ed. James Crawford, Alain Pellet, and Simon Olleson, 676–686. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dinstein, Yoram. 2019. The Law of the Belligerent Occupation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engstrom, Par. 2013. Transitional Justice and Ongoing Conflict. In Transitional Justice and Peacebuilding on the Ground: Victims and Ex-Combatants, ed. Chandra Lekha Sriram, Jemima García-Godos, Olga Martin-Ortega, and Johanna Herman, 41–61. London: Routledge.
Fleig-Goldstein, Rachel M. 2017. The Russian Constitutional Court versus the European Court of Human Rights: How the Strasbourg Court Should Respond to Russia’s Refusal to Execute ECtHR Judgments. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 56: 172–218.
Gowan, Richard. 2015. United Nations Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES) and UN Civilian Police Group in Croatia (UNPSG). In The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations, ed. Joachim A. Koops, Norrie MacQueen, Thierry Tardy, and Paul D. Williams, 519–531. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 2018. Can the United Nations Unite Ukraine? Hudson Institute, February. https://s3.amazonaws.com/media.hudson.org/files/publications/UkraineJan29.pdf.
Grant, Thomas D. 2014. Ukraine v. Russian Federation in Light of Ilaşcu: Two Short Points. EJIL: Talk!, May 22. https://www.ejiltalk.org/ukraine-v-russian-federation-in-light-of-ilascu-two-short-points/.
Griebel, Jörn, and Milan Plücken. 2008. New Developments Regarding the Rules of Attribution? The International Court of Justice’s Decision in Bosnia v. Serbia. Leiden Journal of International Law 21 (3): 601–622.
Huba, Roman. 2019. Why Ukraine’s New Language Law will Have Long-term Consequences. Open Democracy, May 28. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ukraine-language-law-en/.
Hurak, Ihor. 2015. The Minsk Agreement of 2015: A Forced Step or Small Achievement of the Ukrainian Side within the Diplomatic Confrontation around the War in Donbas. The Copernicus Journal of Political Studies 7 (1): 124–140.
Ilko Kucheriv. 2018. Democratic Initiatives Foundation / Razumkov Center Sociological Service. The Future of Donbas: Public Opinion in Ukraine and its Regions, July 20. https://dif.org.ua/en/article/the-future-of-donbas-public-opinion-in-ukraine-and-its-regions.
———. 2019. Democrativ Initiatives Foundation. Daĭ p’iat’! Eksperty proponuiut’ uhodu z novym parlamentom dlia povernennia Krymu i Donbasu. July 24. Kyiv. https://dif.org.ua/article/day_pyaty_experty_proponuyti_krym_donbas?fbclid=IwAR0vYaxDArnE8W6t-FBvhQCLwTJXxCOTRM4SU0zlbsmNeqam42nWZ6SLK8E#.XTqz84CgUiA.facebook.
Jenkins, Robert. 2012. Peacebuilding: From Concept to Commission. London: Routledge.
Kamusella, Tomasz. 2019. After Ukraine’s New Language Law, it is High Time for Ukrainian Russian. New Eastern Europe, August 7. https://neweasterneurope.eu/2019/08/07/after-ukraines-new-language-law-it-is-high-time-for-ukrainian-russian/.
Kardaś, Szymon, and Joanna Rogoěa. 2019. Russia Returns to the Council of Europe. OSW Analyses, May 20. https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2019-05-20/russia-returns-to-council-europe.
Kasianov, Georgiy. 2018. Past Continuous: Istorychna Polityka 1980-kh–2000-kh: Ukraïna ta Susidy. Kyiv: Laurus, Antropos-Lohos-Film.
Katchanovski, Ivan. 2016. The Separatist War in Donbas: A Violent Break-up of Ukraine? European Politics and Society 17 (4): 473–489.
Kemp, Gerhard, and Igor Lyubashenko. 2018. The Conflict in Ukrainian Donbas: International, Regional and Comparative Perspectives on the Jus Post Bellum Options. In The Use of Force against Ukraine and International Law: Jus Ad Bellum, Jus In Bello, Jus Post Bellum, ed. Sergey Sayapin and Evhen Tsybulenko, 329–354. The Hague: T. M. C. Asser Press / Springer.
Kersten, Mark. 2014. Does Russia have a ‘Responsibility to Protect’ Ukraine? Don’t Buy It. The Globe and Mail, March 4. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/does-russia-have-a-responsibility-to-protect-ukraine-dont-buy-it/article17271450/.
Kolstø, Pål. 2006. The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States. Journal of Peace Research 43 (6): 747–764.
Korotkyy, Tymur. 2019. Kvalifikatsiya Porushen’ RF Zhenevskykh Konventsii vid 12 serpnia 1949 r. shchodo Zakhoplenykh Ukraĭnskykh Moriakiv [The Qualification of the Breaches of Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 Concerning Captive Ukrainian Sailors]. Ukrainian Journal of International Law 3: 139–140.
Koskenniemi, Martii. 1990. The Politics of International Law. European Journal of International Law 4 (1): 4–32.
Kozyrska, Antonina. 2016. Decommunisation of the Public Space in Post–Euromaidan Ukraine. Polish Political Science Yearbook 45: 130–144.
Kravchenko, Valeriy. 2019a. Mozhlyvosti Prymyrennia na Donbasi: v Poshukakh Limitiv Kompromisu. PolUkr.net, February 25. http://www.polukr.net/uk/blog/2019/02/mozlivosti-primrienia-na-donbasi/.
———. 2019b. Security Passport: Case Study of Hybrid Warfare Techniques in Ukrainian Regions. Diagnosis before Prevention. Lecture Delivered on the Conference ‘Hybrid Warfare: Phenomenon and Reaction’. L’viv, Ukraine, June 11.
Lachowski, Tomasz. 2017. Transitional Justice in Ongoing Conflicts and Post-War Reconstruction: Reintegrating Donbas into Ukraine. Polish Political Science Yearbook 46 (2): 36–54.
———. 2018. Prawo Międzynarodowe Praw Człowieka jako Instrument Przeciwdziałania Skutkom Powaěnego Naruszenia Prawa Międzynarodowego Publicznego—Analiza Wybranych Aspektów Przypadku Agresji Federacji Rosyjskiej wobec Ukrainy (w latach 2014–2018) [International Human Rights Law as an Instrument to Counteract the Consequences of Serious Violations of International Public Law—Analysis of the Selected Aspects of the Case of Aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine (2014–2018)]. Wschodni Rocznik Humanistyczny 15 (4): 25–58.
Lanovoy, Vladyslav. 2017. The Use of Force by Non-State Actors and the Limits of Attribution of Conduct. European Journal of International Law 28 (2): 563–585.
Legucka, Agnieszka. 2017. Frozen and Freezing Conflicts in Eastern Europe and South Caucasus: Implications for Regional Security. Yearbook of the Institute of East-Central Europe 15 (2): 79–97.
Lynch, Justin. 2019. Zelenskyy Flounders in Bid to End Ukraine’s War. Foreign Policy, October 11. https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/11/zelensky-pushes-peace-deal-ukraine-war-russia-donbass-steinmeier-formula/.
Lyubashenko, Igor. 2017. Transitional Justice in Post-Euromaidan Ukraine: Swimming Upstream. Peter Lang Pub Inc: Frankfurt am Main.
Mahda, Yevhen. 2018. Russia’s Hybrid Aggression: Lessons for the world. Kyiv: Kalamar.
Malyarenko, Tatyana, and Stefan Wolff. 2018. The Logic of Competitive Influence-Seeking: Russia, Ukraine, and the Conflict in Donbas. Post-Soviet Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1080/1060586X.2018.1425083.
Marchuk, Iryna. 2016. Ukraine and the International Criminal Court: Implications of the Ad Hoc Jurisdiction Acceptance and Beyond. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 49 (2): 323–370.
Milanović, Marko. 2009. State Responsibility for Acts of Non-state Actors: A Comment on Griebel and Plücken. Leiden Journal of International Law 22 (2): 307–324.
———. 2015. Ukraine Derogates from the ICCPR and the ECHR, Files Fourth Interstate Application against Russia. EJIL: Talk!, October 5. https://www.ejiltalk.org/ukraine-derogates-from-the-iccpr-and-the-echr-files-fourth-interstate-application-against-russia/.
Mitrokhin, Nikolay. 2015. Infiltration, Instruction, Invasion: Russia’s War in the Donbass. Journal of Soviet & Post-Soviet Politics & Society 1 (1): 219–249.
Nemtsova, Anna. 2014. Who Will Be the President of Novorossiya? Foreign Policy, April 29. https://foreignpolicy.com/2014/04/29/who-will-be-the-president-of-novorossiya/.
Nuzov, Ilya. 2017. The Dynamics of Collective Memory in the Ukraine Crisis: A Transitional Justice Perspective. International Journal of Transitional Justice 11: 132–153.
O’Loughlin, John, Gerard Toal, and Vladimir Kolosov. 2017. The Rise and Fall of “Novorossiya”: Examining Support for a Separatist Geopolitical Imaginary in Southeast Ukraine. Post-Soviet Affairs 33 (2): 124–144.
Orakhelashvili, Alexander. 2003. Restrictive Interpretation of Human Rights Treaties in the Recent Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. European Journal of International Law 14 (3): 529–568.
Pegg, Scott. 1998. De Facto States in the International System. Working Paper No. 21 (Institute of International Relations The University of British Columbia, February).
Pifer, Steven. 2019. How to End the War in Ukraine. What an American-Led Peace Plan Should Look Like. Foreign Affairs, November 21. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2019-11-21/how-end-war-ukraine.
Polunina, Valentyna. 2016. Between Interests and Values Ukraine’s Contingent Acceptance of International Criminal Justice. In After Nuremberg. Exploring Multiple Dimensions of the Acceptance of International Criminal Justice, ed. Susanne Buckley-Zistel, Friederike Mieth, and Marjana Papa. Nuremberg: International Nuremberg Principles Academy. http://www.nurembergacademy.org/fileadmin/media/pdf/acceptance/Ukraine.pdf.
President of Ukraine. 2019. Statement by President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the General Debate of the 74th session of the UN General Assembly, September 25. https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/vistup-prezidenta-ukrayini-volodimira-zelenskogo-na-zagalnih-57477.
Pryshchepa, Kateryna. 2019. The State of Decentralization in Ukraine. New Eastern Europe 35 (1): 89–95.
Razumkov Centre. 2019. Hromadska Dumka pro Sytuatsiiu na Donbasi ta Shliakhy Vidnovlennia Suverenitetu Ukraïny nad Okupovanymy Terytoriiamy, October 11. http://razumkov.org.ua/napriamky/sotsiologichni-doslidzhennia/gromadska-dumka-pro-sytuatsiiu-na-donbasi-ta-shliakhy-vidnovlennia-suverenitetu-ukrainy-nad-okupovanymy-terytoriiamy.
Riabchuk, Mykola. 2015. ‘Two Ukraines’ Reconsidered: The End of Ukrainian Ambivalence? Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism 15 (1): 138–156.
Romanchuk, Oleh. 2017. Viïna Rosiï proty Ukraïny. Chomu Rechi ne Nazyvaiut’ Svoïmy Imenamy? Radio Svoboda, January 3. https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/28211790.html.
Sasse, Gwendolyn. 2017. The Donbas—Two Parts, or Still One? The Experience of War through the Eyes of the Regional Population. ZOiS Report 1. https://www.zoisberlin.de/fileadmin/media/Dateien/ZOiS_Reports/ZOiS_Report_2_2017.pdf.
———. 2019. Most People in Separatist-held Areas of Donbas Prefer Reintegration with Ukraine—New Survey. The Conversation, October 14. http://theconversation.com/most-people-in-separatist-held-areas-of-donbas-prefer-reintegration-with-ukraine-new-survey-124849.
Sassòli, Marco. 2007. Ius ad Bellum and Ius in Bello—The Separation between the Legality of the Use of Force and Humanitarian Rules to Be Respected in Warfare: Crucial or Outdated? In International Law and Armed Conflict: Exploring the Faultlines. Essays in Honour of Yoram Dinstein, ed. Michael N. Schmitt and Jelena Pejic, 241–264. Leiden and Boston: Martinus Nijhof Publisher.
Sayapin, Sergey. 2018. A Curious Aggression Trial in Ukraine. Some Reflections on the Alexandrov and Yerofeyev Case. Journal of International Criminal Justice 16: 1093–1104.
———. 2019. The End of Russia’s Hybrid War against Ukraine? Opinio Iuris, January 4. http://opiniojuris.org/2019/01/04/the-end-of-russias-hybrid-war-against-ukraine/.
Shpak, Alina. 2019. Summary of De-communization in Ukraine, Lecture delivered at the Eastern Europe Initiatives Congress, Lublin, Poland, September 23.
So-called “DNR Minister” decides to use SBU Program “Waiting for You at Home”. 2018, August 28. https://ssu.gov.ua/en/news/1/category/21/view/5146#.nMDWJ2n5.dpbs.
Stahn, Carsten. 2001. The United Nations Transitional Administration in Kosovo and East Timor: First Analysis. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 5: 105–183.
———. 2008. The Law and Practice of International Territorial Administration: Versailles to Iraq and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stan, Lavinia. 2009. Transitional Justice in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union: Reckoning with the Communist Past. New York and London: Routledge.
Strzelecki, Jan, Wojciech Konończuk, and Tadeusz Iwański. 2017. Russia’s ploy with UN forces in the Donbas. OSW Analyses, September 6. https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2017-09-06/russias-ploy-un-forces-donbas.
Szpak, Agnieszka. 2017. Legal Classification of the Armed Conflict in Ukraine in Light of International Humanitarian Law. Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies 58 (3): 261–280.
Teitel, Ruti. 2000. Transitional Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tymchuk, Dmytro, Iuriï Karin, Konstiantyn Mashovets’, and V’iacheslav Husarov. 2016. Vtorhnennia v Ukraïnu: Khronyka rosiïs’koï ahresiï. Kyïv: Braĭt Star Pablyshynh.
Venice Commission, Report on the State Language Law of Ukraine, 6 December 2019, https://search.coe.int/directorate_of_communications/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016809933ef.
Wittke, Cindy. 2019. The Minsk Agreements—More than “Scraps of Paper”? East European Politics 35 (3): 264–290.
Wynnyckyj, Mychailo. 2019. Ukraine’s Maidan, Russia’s War: A Chronicle and Analysis of the Revolution of Dignity. Ibidem Press.
Yakubova, Larysa. 2018. “Russkyĭ mir” v Ukraïni: na Kraiu Prirvy. [Russian World in Ukraine: On the Edge of an Abyss]. Kyïv: Vydavnytsvo “Klio”.
Zadorozhnii, Oleksandr. 2016. International Law in the Relations of Ukraine and the Russian Federation. Kyiv: K.I.S.
“Zelenskyy Lists Four Elements For Reintegration Of Donbas And Crimea”. 2019. Ukrainian News, October 30. https://ukranews.com/en/news/662778-zelenskyy-lists-four-elements-for-reintegration-of-donbas-and-crimea.
Zmina. 2019. The Coalition for the ICC and its Members Sent a Letter to the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Calling for Prompt Ratification of the ICC Rome Statute and Commitment to Fight Impunity Domestically, October 1. https://org.zmina.info/en/statements-en/joint-letter-to-the-president-of-ukraine-on-icc-rome-statute-ratification/.
Case Law
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). 2001. Banković and Others v. Belgium and 16 Other States, Application no. 52207/99, December 12.
ECtHR, Catan v. Moldova and Russia, Application no. 43370/04, 19 October 2012.
ECtHR, Chiragov v. Armenia, Application no. 13216/05, 16 June 2015.
ECtHR, Cyprus v. Turkey, Application no. 25781/94, 10 May 2001.
ECtHR, Ilașcu v. Moldova and Russia, Application no. 48787/99, 8 July 2004.
ECtHR, Khlebik v. Ukraine, Application no. 2945/16, 25 July 2017.
ECtHR, Lefter v. Ukraine and Russia, Application no. 30863/14, communicated on 9 January 2018.
ECtHR, Loizidou v. Turkey, Application no. 15318/89, 23 March 1995.
ECtHR, Öcalan v. Turkey, Application no. 46221/99, 12 May 2005.
ECtHR, Sargsyan v. Azerbaijan, Application no. 40167/06, 16 June 2015.
ECtHR, Tsezar v. Ukraine, Application no. 73590/14, 13 February 2018.
International Criminal Court (ICC), Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2015, 12 November 2015, https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/OTP-PE-rep-2015-Eng.pdf.
ICC, Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2017, 4 December 2017, https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/2017-PE-rep/2017-otp-rep-PE_ENG.pdf.
ICC, Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2018, 5 December 2018, https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/181205-rep-otp-PE-ENG.pdf.
International Court of Justice (ICJ), Judgment on the application of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Ukraine v. Russian Federation), 8 November 2019.
ICJ, Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa), ICJ Reports 1971, Advisory Opinion of 21 June 1971.
ICJ, Bosnia v. Serbia, ICJ Reports 2007, 26 February 2007.
ICJ, Nicaragua v. the United States of America, ICJ Reports 1986, 27 June 1986.
International Law Commission (ILC), Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, Supplement no. 10 (A/56/10), November 2001.
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Prosecutor v D. Tadić (Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction), 2 October 1995.
International Tribunal for the Law of Sea (ITLOS), Ukraine v. the Russian Federation, 25 May 2019.
Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), The Chorzów Factory case, PCIJ 1928, Ser. A, no. 17, 13 September 1928.
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 November 2018 to 15 February 2019, 21 March 2019, https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/ReportUkraine16Nov2018-15Feb2019.pdf.
Report of the UN Secretary-General (UNSG), Brahimi Report, UN Doc A/55/305-S/2000/89 (2000).
Report of the UNSG, Causes of conflicts and promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa, UN Doc A/52/871-S/1998/318 (1998).
Report of the UNSG, The rule of law and transitional justice in conflict and post-conflict societies, UN Doc S/2004/616 (2004).
Supreme Court of Canada, Reference Re Secession of Quebec, 2 S.C.R. 217, 20 August 1998.
Domestic Laws of Ukraine
Verkhovna Rada. 2014. Pro Osoblyvzj Poryadok Miscevogo Samovryaduvannya v Okremyh Rajonah Doneckoyi ta Luganskoyi Oblastej [On the Special Order of Local Self-Government in Certain Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts], September 16. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1680-18.
———. 2015. Pro Vnesennia Zminy do Kryminal′noho Kodeksu Ukrainy Shchodo Perevyshchennia Viĭskovoiu Ssluzhbovoiu Osoboiu Vlady Chy Sluzhbovykh Povnovazhen, April 7, http://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/290-19.
———. 2018. Pro Osoblyvosti Derzhavnoyi Polityky iz Zabezpechennya Derzhavnogo Suverenitetu Ukrayini na Timchasovo Okupovanyh Teritoriyah u Doneckij ta Luganskij Oblastyah [On the Peculiarities of State Policy on Guaranteeing State Sovereignty of Ukraine on the Temporarily Occupied Territories in Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts], January 18. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2268-19.
———. 2019. Pro Zabezpechennia Funktsionuvannia Ukraïnckoï Movy yak Derzhavnoï, April 25. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2704-19.
Interviews
With Hnatovsky, Mykola. 2019. The First Vice-President of the Ukrainian Association of International Law and Chairman of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, August 27, Kyiv.
With Lishchyna, Ivan. 2018. Deputy Minister of Justice of Ukraine—Government Commissioner for European Court of Human Rights, June 1, Kyiv.
With Martynenko, Oleg. 2018. Chief of the Analytical Department of Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, November 28, Kyiv.
With Tuka, Heorhiy. 2018. Deputy Minister for the Temporarily Occupied Territories and Internally Displaced Persons of Ukraine, January 18, Kyiv.
With Tymchuk, Dmytro. 2018. A military Expert, the Coordinator of the “Information Resistance”, November 28, Kyiv.
With Zolotukhin, Dmytro, 2018. Deputy Minister of Information Policy of Ukraine, November 27, Kyiv.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lachowski, T. (2020). The Reintegration of Donbas Through Reconstruction and Accountability. An International Law Perspective. In: Shelest, H., Rabinovych, M. (eds) Decentralization, Regional Diversity, and Conflict. Federalism and Internal Conflicts. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41765-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41765-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-41764-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-41765-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)