Abstract
War is theoretically subject to the laws of armed conflict but, in practice, it brings in its wake war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression. The parties to an armed conflict are unable and/or unwilling to hold the perpetrators of these crimes (oftentimes their own citizens) to account. Part of the rationale for establishment of the International Criminal Court was to offer a way forward in this regard. Yet the suspected war criminal – even the political leader of the aggressor state – must be apprehended and brought to The Hague so that he may face the Court. This is no easy task, thwarted by a variety of formal, factual, and political obstacles; all too often, the idea of a supranational justice system presided over by the International Criminal Court proves illusory, if not fictitious. In this article, these points are discussed in reference to the crimes being committed against the Ukrainian population by the Russian aggressors.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
