Armenia signed the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1999 but did not ratify it. The process was interrupted by the decision of the CC in 2004 by the decision; this document was recognized as contrary to the Constitution. And there are comments that after that 2004 decision, the Constitutional Court had no right to re-examine such a case, according to the Law on the “Constitutional Court,” according to which the decisions of the Supreme Court are final and not subject to review.
But in 2023, on March 24, the CC recognized the Rome Statute as conforming to the Constitution this time. Although the Rome Statute contradicted the two provisions of the Constitution, neither in 2005 nor in 2015 had undergone any semantic changes.
The government took this step, according to the goal announced at the meeting of the RA Government on December 29 of last year, “So that Armenia can make the statute of the International Criminal Court applicable from May 12, 2021, to the war crimes committed during the aggression against the sovereign territory of Armenia, Concerning crimes, along with the ratification, it is necessary to accept a statement on recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court with retroactive effect, starting at 00:00 on May 12, 2021.” Let’s emphasize we are not talking about responsibility for the crimes committed during the 44-day war because the return is given from May 2021, and we are talking exclusively about the war crimes committed on the territory of Armenia, not Artsakh.
“It is difficult to say at this moment, but to some extent, it may also refer to the blockade, and from the point of view that part of its consequences is also felt in the territory of the Republic of Armenia, from the point of view of separating families from each other. But it’s a bit complicated; I won’t express a definite position on that,” said international law specialist Ara Khzmalyan, a guest on Aravot’s “Areresum” (“Confrontation”) program.
Read also
The other guest, international law specialist Anna Melikyan noted. “The International Criminal Court is used when a state cannot bring to justice with its internal forces those persons who have committed severe crimes: war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide. In other words, the first task is to bring responsibility at the domestic level. Our problem in the case of crimes committed against Armenia or on its territory was that we did not have an effective lever already in place, including within the framework of international cooperation, Interpol, Europol, and others., to ensure that the alleged perpetrators or organizers of crimes by Azerbaijan would also be brought to justice on the territory of our state. Therefore, this is an additional guarantee, primarily for protecting our citizens and victims.”
Turkey and Azerbaijan are not members of the Rome Statute of the ICC. And Azerbaijan ignores the decisions of international legal structures, for example, the decision of the International Court of Justice, by which Baku was obliged to ensure uninterrupted traffic through the Berdzor corridor. Responding to this reminder, Ara Khzmalyan said: “The fact that a certain action does not achieve the ultimate goal does not mean it does not have an effect. In other words, we should not think that the decision of the ECHR did not benefit us; the decision of the International Court of Justice did not give results, so they are generally ineffective. No. Any such decision has a cumulative effect, benefits diplomatically, theoretically prepares the ground for sanctions.”
Without even ratifying, the International Criminal Court could initiate legal proceedings. Russia and Ukraine do not state that the Rome Statute has been ratified, but the ICC decided to arrest the President of the Russian Federation in 2023 on March 17. In response to this mention, Anna Melikyan specifically reminded: “In the case of Russia and Ukraine, more than 40 states have petitioned the court to initiate this investigation.”
After the ratification of the Rome Statute, will Armenia be obliged to comply with the earlier decisions of The Hague Court, in particular, regarding the arrest of the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin?
See the experts’ conclusions about this in the whole conversation.
Anna ISRAELYAN
