The crime of aggression is part of Russian law, the law of Belarus, and the law of Ukraine. The international criminal court has jurisdiction only over three of those four crimes. It would be very difficult to prove for a political leader like Vladimir Putin that he is responsible for a war crime that takes place in Marry, apart or Boogshad. What you really need is what is called a leadership crime, which is crime attributable to only those who sit at the top table.
On the 17th March 2023, just over a year into Russia’s war in Ukraine, the International Criminal Court issued two arrest warrants. One for Vladimir Putin and one for Maria Lvova-Belova, whose title is Commissioner for Children’s Rights in the Office of the President of the Russian Federation. Some viewed these arrest warrants as a fundamental point of progress and justice in the war. Others raised concerns about the feasibility and potential consequences of prosecuting a sitting head of state.
Throughout history, leaders accused of war crimes have faced varying degrees of accountability and Putin’s case raises important questions about legal frameworks, the role of international institutions like the International Criminal Court, and the challenges involved in holding high-ranking officials responsible for their actions.
On this episode of the podcast, we analyse the implications of prosecuting Putin for war crimes - with Philippe Sands, lawyer and author of East West Street: On the Origins of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity - and Daniel Krcmaric, academic and author of The Justice Dilemma: Leaders and Exile in an Era of Accountability. Our host is journalist and academic Philippa Thomas.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices