Укр Eng
+380 (44) 278-80-24
“Almanac of Law”
  1. Home
  2.  ⇒ 
  3. Almanac of law. Issue 17 (2026)
  4.  ⇒ 
  5. Selected issues of the ratione materiae of the Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine

Almanac of law. Issue 17 (2026), pages 124–131.

DOI: 10.33663/2524-017X-2026-17-124-131

Bazov V. P., Dere Y.
Selected issues of the ratione materiae of the Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine

The article provides an in-depth analysis of the ratione materiae of the Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine. The authors argue that the implementation of the concept of “aggressive war” into the Statute of the Tribunal is essential for a clear differentiation of the actus reus as a “manifest violation” of the UN Charter, taking into account the criteria of scale, character, and gravity of the act. The research emphasizes that the introduction of this term is not merely a linguistic choice but a strategic legal necessity aimed at aligning the Tribunal’s jurisdiction with the historical precedents of Nuremberg, while simultaneously addressing the gaps in the modern Rome Statute framework. It is proven that the initiation of an aggressive war constitutes a breach of erga omnes obligations, as such an act encroaches upon the fundamental values of the international community and destroys the foundations of global security. The author analyzes the evolution of these obligations from the Barcelona Traction case to the present, highlighting that the prohibition of aggression has reached the status of jus cogens. It is the recognition of this principle by the member states of the Council of Europe that serves as the legal basis for the collective protection of the international legal order through actio popularis. This procedural mechanism allows for a collective response to the most serious breaches of international law, legitimizing the creation of a regional-based tribunal with international backing. A particular emphasis is placed on the interaction between the Special Tribunal, the Register of Damage, and the International Compensation Mechanism, which is currently in its developmental stage. The article provides a detailed justification for the institutional synergy between these bodies. It is argued that the qualification of actions as an “aggressive war” creates a solid legal basis for recording damages and guarantees the implementation of the principle of full international legal responsibility of the aggressor state through reparation mechanisms. The study concludes that the evidentiary findings and judicial verdicts of the Special Tribunal regarding the leadership’s guilt will serve as a prejudicial foundation for the material claims processed by the Compensation Commission. Thus, the inclusion of “aggressive war” in the Statute serves as an undeniable basis for documenting losses, ensuring the restoration of justice, and the full realization of the principle of state responsibility for international crimes. This comprehensive approach ensures that the accountability process encompasses both individual criminal liability and the state’s obligation to provide full restitution for the harm caused to the international legal order.

Key words: act of aggression, aggressive war, crime of aggression, Nuremberg Tribunal, leadership crime, Special Tribunal for the crime of aggression, liability, erga omnes, actio popularis.

 References

  1. Cicero T. De Officiis / with an English translation by Walter Miller. London; New York: William Heinemann Ltd; G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1928. 427 p. (The Loeb Classical Library).
  2. Covenant of the League of Nations: 28 April URL:https://www.refworld.org/legal/constinstr/lon/1919/en/17145
  3. Dohovir pro zaboronu viiny yak zasobu natsionalnoi polityky (Pakt Briana-Kelloha): Dohovir Soiuzu Rad. Sotsialist. Respublik vid 27.08.1928. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_647#Text (data zvernennia: 20.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  4. Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal: Official Text. Nuremberg: Secretariat of the Tribunal, 1947. Vol. I: Official Documents. 367 p.
  5. Entsyklopediia mizhnarodnoho prava: u 3 t. / redkol.: S. Shemshuchenko, V. N. Denysov (spivholovy) ta in.; In-t derzhavy i prava im. V. M. Koretskoho NAN Ukrainy. Kyiv: Akademperiodyka, 2014. T. 1: A–D. 920 (in Ukr.).
  6. Grzebyk Criminal Responsibility for the Crime of Aggression. London; New York: Routledge, 2013. 409 p.
  7. Statut Orhanizatsii Obiednanykh Natsii i Statut Mizhnarodnoho Sudu: Statut Orhan. Obiedn. Natsii vid 26.06.1945: stanom na 16 veres. 2005 r. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_010#Text (data zvernennia: 23.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  8. Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo Uganda): Judgment of 19 December 2005. ICJ Reports 2005. P. 168. URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/116/116-20051219-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf
  9. Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua United States of America): Judgment of 27 June 1986. ICJ Reports 1986. P. 14. URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/70/070-19860627-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026).
  10. Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium Spain): Judgment of 5 February 1970. ICJ Reports 1970. P. 3. URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/50/050-19700205-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026).
  11. South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Second Phase: Judgment of 18 July 1966. ICJ Reports 1966. P. 6. URL: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/47/047-19660718-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026).
  12. Bazov O. Doktryna action popularis u mizhnarodnomu sudovomu protsesi: henezysnyi i tsinnisnyi vymir. Slovo Natsionalnoi shkoly suddiv 2020. № 1 (30). S. 26–38. DOI 10.37566/2707-6849-2020-1(30)-2. URL: https://slovo.nsj.gov.ua/images/pdf/2020_1_30/Bazov.Doktryna.pdf (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  13. Deklaratsiia pro pryntsypy mizhnarodnoho prava, shcho stosuiutsia druzhnikh vidnosyn i spivrobitnytstva mizh derzhavamy vidpovidno do Statutu Orhanizatsii Obiednanykh Natsii: Rezoliutsiia Heneralnoi Asamblei OON vid 24.10.1970 r. № 2625 (XXV). URL: https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/declarations/intlaw_principles.shtml (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  14. Zakliuchnyi akt Narady z bezpeky ta spivrobitnytstva v Yevropi: Akt Orhan. Obiedn. Natsii vid 01.08.1975. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_055#Text (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  15. Popravky do Rymskoho statutu Mizhnarodnoho kryminalnoho sudu, shcho stosuiutsia zlochynu ahresii: pryiniati na Kampalskii ohliadovii konferentsii 06.2010 r. Rezoliutsiia RC/Res.6. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_004-10#Text  (data zvernennia: 24.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  16. Sayapin S. The Crime of Aggression in International Criminal Law: Historical Development, Comparative Analysis and Present The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press, 2014. 334 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-927-6
  17. Kryminalne pravo Zahalna chastyna: pidruchnyk / Yu. V. Baulin ta in.; za red. V. V. Stashysa, V. Ya. Tatsiia. 4-te vyd., pererobl. i dopov. Kharkiv: Pravo, 2010. 455 s. (in Ukr.).
  18. Uhoda mizh Ukrainoiu ta Radoiu Yevropy pro stvorennia Spetsialnoho trybunalu shcho stosuietsia zlochynu ahresii proty Statut Spetsialnoho trybunalu shcho stosuietsia zlochynu ahresii proty Ukrainy: Uhoda Ukraina vid 25.06.2025: stanom na 15 lyp. 2025 r. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/994_002-25#Text (data zvernennia: 21.02.2026) (in Ukr.).
  19. Definition of Aggression : Resolution adopted by the General Assembly of 14 December 1974 № 3314 (XXIX). URL: https://docs.un.org/en/A/RES/3314(XXIX (data zvernennia: 21.02.2026).

Дата першого надходження рукопису до видання: 25.02.2026
Дата прийнятого до друку рукопису після рецензування: 09.04.2026
Дата публікації: 30.04.2026

 

 

Back to contents