Ukraine Faces Russia at the International Court of Justice​

By BK​

What do you need to know this week?

Ukraine and Russia are supposed to be facing off at the UN’s highest court, International Court of Justice (ICJ). Both countries are signatories of the 1948 UN Convention on Genocide (the ‘Treaty’) which names the ICJ as the forum for resolving disputes between signatories. However, on Monday, Russia boycotted the hearing.

Ukraine addressed the ICJ on Monday to reject Russia’s claims that genocide has been committed in eastern Ukraine, before calling for emergency measures to halt aggressive Russian advancement across the country which has displaced over 1.5 million refugees all across Ukraine’s borders and killed hundreds of civilians. Ukraine also argued that the Russian offensive was a direct violation of the Treaty and Russia has falsely applied the Treaty to justify its invasion.

Why is this important for your interviews?

The ICJ is the highest international court for resolving disputes between states. While cases may take several years to resolve, the ICJ has a fast-track procedure to look at requests for "provisional measures" such as those requested by Ukraine.

The court can order provisional measures to prevent a situation from worsening before it looks at more fundamental questions such as whether it has jurisdiction, or the merits of a case.

However, while the court's orders are legally binding, states do not always follow the court's orders.

How is this topic relevant to law firms?

Unfortunately, in practice, the weak enforcement powers of the ICJ is often bolstered by the political actions of other signatories of the relevant treaty. Often, other states will use the judgment handed down by the ICJ as a means to justify their countermeasures, such as intensifying their list of sanctions, for example. Sanctions will have wide-ranging political and economic implications. Businesses who continue to trade in Russia will not only face potential criminal liability, but also face significant public backlash.

Law firms with a strong practice in public international law have occasionally stepped in to help represent states in the ICJ in disputes regarding bi-lateral trade agreements. However, in cases with great moral, ethical and political stakes, law firms will be likely to be impacted indirectly.

Due to escalating sanctions levied at Russia and greater political outrage, law firms will have to help their clients navigate and exit their businesses in Russia. In fact, law firms themselves will have to consider how sanctions will affect their business and how continuing to trade in Russia will impact their reputation. Within the last week alone, Linklaters and Norton Rose Fulbright have pulled out of their Russian operations.