Abstract
The main objective of the article is to prove the need for the state to have a centralised legal strategy to ensure the protection of state interests on an international level during a hybrid conflict. Centralisation of control and the planning and implementation of legal actions on an international level are core elements of such a strategy, especially for actions under the jurisdiction of international institutions. This article provides an analysis of treaties and of the practice of adjudication in Ukraine during the conflict with the Russian Federation. The findings of the study show that the legal dimension of hybrid conflict has some sub-levels: legal actions of states in hybrid conflicts taken at interstate level; the level of enterprises controlled by the state; and the private level. The practice of Ukraine shows that the exercising of a multilevel legal encounter during a hybrid war faces a number of problems including the intersection of actions (sometimes even direct conflict), even among authorities involved in the legal protection of state interests; and problems with collecting and analysing the information necessary to protect state interests in the legal dimension; state authorities that are not directly involved in a legal encounter may exercise actions which will complicate the legal position of the state. One of the first steps taken by the state in a hybrid conflict is, therefore, to create special authority or entrust an existing one with the coordination of the functions of lawfare. The next step of such an authority is the strategic "programming" of the opponent's legal actions with the aim of achieving an advantage in the legal dimension of a hybrid conflict.
Highlights
The issues related to Ukraine’s legal encounters with the Russian Federation have been a matter of scientific dispute since Ukrainian independence
When we are talking about lawfare on the interstate level, actions implemented by states that embody the essence of this practice are an objective phenomenon that needs to be investigated impartially, for instance without analysis of whether they are positive or negative, and especially taking into account that the main aim of lawfare is to prove that any actions of state are within international law
We previously looked at the example of the Russian Federation blocking cargo on the territory of Ukraine
Summary
The issues related to Ukraine’s legal encounters with the Russian Federation have been a matter of scientific dispute since Ukrainian independence. The need to investigate this phenomenon was confirmed by numerous examples of international legal actions taken by both states in the international arena. This situation was considered, as part of the normal legal encounters between states having international relations. The discussion continued in this direction even after the beginning of the armed conflict in 2014 (Ukrainian Association of International Law, 2014). Further activity by the Russian Federation brought into question the crucial legal dimension of an encounter with Russia (together with the need to comprehend lawfare in general and the use of legal means in contemporary state conflicts). Lawfare needs to be investigated from the position of contemporary international law
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
