The term “hybrid war of Russia against Ukraine” occupies a prominent place in expert’s analytical materials. It comprises not only informational, diplomatic, historical, and military, but also a legal, components. On December 15, Moscow’s Dorogomilovsky Court began to hear a case based on a suit to classify the 2014 events in Ukraine as a coup d’etat, Gazeta.ru reports. Moscow has again resorted to its favorite method – to “resolve the problem” through the hands of Ukrainians themselves. The lawsuit was filed by former Verkhovna Rada member Volodymyr Oliinyk who ran away together with the Yanukovych family to the aggressor’s territory. The ex-MP urged the court to recognize the juridical fact of a coup d’etat in Ukraine and, hence, illegitimacy of the current leadership. Oliinyk said in the courtroom that former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych would take part in the session in the near future.
“The Moscow court hearing of a case to classify the 2014 events in Ukraine as a coup d’etat is another idiocy of the tyranny that is in a socioeconomic and intellectual crisis,” Oleksandr Turchynov, Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council, wrote in Facebook.
“Firstly, the Russian court had no right at all to begin hearing this case. Secondly, no matter what ruling this court hands down, it will not be legally binding on the territory of Ukraine,” international law expert Volodymyr Vasylenko told The Day. “Hearing this case at a Russian court is interference into the internal affairs of Ukraine. Only Ukrainian investigatory and judicial bodies can interpret the events that occur in our country. Foreign bodies have no right to do this. Accordingly, this court will have no legal consequences. From the political viewpoint, it is just for show. They will be fanning emotions again about an illegal government in Kyiv, a junta that seized power and is therefore illegitimate. This is also a method to keep up tension inside Ukraine – the tactic of the so-called ‘managed chaos.’”
While Russian courts are obeying orders and opening framed cases that have nothing to do with law, the Ukrainian authorities and courts are reluctant to handle the consequences of Russian aggression, although there is sufficient evidence. This causes the public to respond. For example, Andrii Senchenko’s organization “The Power of Law” has been gathering evidence and proving in courts the fact of the Kremlin’s aggression for several years, whereas Presidential Administration representatives refused to recognize this fact at a court session. It is not just a paradox but the absolute absence of a state-supporting attitude.
“The brunt of the responsibility for investigating and indicting those guilty of the Kremlin’s crimes on the territory of Ukraine lies with Ukraine, not with the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC intervenes only if the state is unable or unwilling to bring the guilty to justice,” says Mykola Hnatovsky, an associate professor at the International Law Department of Kyiv Taras Shevchenko National University’s Institute of International Relations. “Unfortunately, the official attitude of the Ukrainian government has remained unclear since 2014. We are living in two parallel realities. There have been a lot of clear high-profile statements from the Verkhovna Rada, the President of Ukraine, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs about Russian aggression against Ukraine, but still everybody continues to say it is an anti-terrorist operation, not a war. But this does not relieve the state of the duty to prosecute those guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
