On 1 January, Ukraine officially joined the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), becoming its 125th member state. This marks a significant step in aligning with the global legal framework that prosecutes individuals for the gravest violations of international law, including war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of aggression. But what does this membership mean for Ukraine, and how might it shape ongoing and future investigations? Volodymyr Yavorskyi, a human rights defender and programme director at the Centre for Civil Liberties, shared his insights in an interview with The Ukrainian Week.
***
– With its full membership in the International Criminal Court, Ukraine now gains greater opportunities than it had since recognising the court’s jurisdiction in 2015. These include voting rights on budget approvals, amendments to the Rome Statute, and the election of judges, the prosecutor, and their deputies, among other key decisions. What practical changes does this bring for Ukraine, and how can the country make the most of these opportunities?
– First, Ukraine needs to appoint a dedicated representative to advocate for its interests within the International Criminal Court (ICC)—someone well-versed in its mechanisms and capable of influencing decision-making. While Ukraine has been an associate member of the ICC since 2015, when it recognised the court’s jurisdiction, its diplomatic presence at ICC meetings has been minimal.
This is crucial for engaging in the political processes that shape the court’s work. For example, the ICC’s budget directly determines how many investigations it can undertake in Ukraine. Despite its ambition to investigate a wide range of crimes, the court is tightly constrained by funding, allowing only a limited number of cases to proceed. These financial limitations are an unavoidable reality.
Additionally, there are significant political dimensions to consider. Crimes demanding attention also occur across Africa, South America, and Asia, making the ICC’s agenda a constant matter of political negotiation. Ukraine must articulate a clear position on these issues, as doing so directly impacts international support in its war against Russia. Many nations feel the global focus is disproportionately on Ukraine, sidelining other crises. To maintain their support at the UN and other international forums, Ukraine must show its commitment to combating crimes globally and upholding the principle that aggression is unacceptable anywhere. By doing so, Ukraine has an opportunity to position itself as a leader in the fight for international justice.
– Fadi El Abdallah, spokesperson for the International Criminal Court, has stated that including a Ukrainian judge among the ICC judges will depend on the Assembly’s vote. How realistic is this possibility?
– We now have the right to nominate a Ukrainian judge, though their appointment will ultimately depend on their qualifications. Proficiency in languages and a deep understanding of international court jurisprudence are key requirements. Ukraine does have several qualified individuals who could hold this position, and we are in a position to put forward strong candidates. This would have a considerable political impact on the ICC’s work.
– The ICC is currently investigating two cases related to war crimes in Ukraine: the illegal deportation of children and attacks on civilian infrastructure. Yet, these are far from the full extent of the crimes committed by Russia during the war. How will Ukraine’s membership in the ICC influence these ongoing investigations, as well as the potential for new ones?
– I believe it will, as Ukraine’s membership politically expands the ICC’s mandate. With active participation, Ukraine can help the court secure more political and financial resources to address these cases. For example, in the case of child deportations, additional charges could be brought, given the involvement of multiple individuals. Moreover, new cases could emerge, covering issues like torture, the killing of prisoners of war, and other crimes. Human rights defenders and the Prosecutor General’s Office have already gathered and submitted substantial evidence.
Ultimately, it will be up to the ICC to decide which cases to pursue. I understand that the court is already investigating up to ten other cases and may take on one or two more, though financial constraints limit its capacity. To put it in perspective, the ICC’s budget is smaller than that of the Prosecutor General’s Office, despite the court’s broader mandate to handle cases worldwide. As a result, the primary responsibility for these investigations will still fall to Ukraine, with the ICC playing a vital supporting role.
– The International Criminal Court is susceptible to political influence. For example, Donald Trump recently declared that should he return to power, he would impose sanctions on the ICC. Should these statements raise concern? And what do they signal about the broader implications?
– This is indeed a serious concern. Trump has a history of influencing the justice system, and there is a real risk that such sanctions could be enacted. The only mitigating factor is that Congress would also need to approve them, and I remain hopeful that the United States will not take that route. Imposing these sanctions would not only halt investigations in Ukraine but also globally, which would clearly not serve American interests.
Although this is tied to the ICC’s decision to investigate possible crimes between Israel and Hamas, which doesn’t directly involve Ukraine, the consequences could still affect us. If sanctions were imposed, they would freeze all global investigations and severely hinder the ICC’s progress. For the next five years, the court could be rendered ineffective, setting us back 30 years to a time when there was no international structure in place to even minimally deter such crimes.
– While the significance of international investigations cannot be overstated, the responsibility for probing most crimes will ultimately fall on Ukraine. With that in mind, is our legislation equipped to handle the challenge?
– First and foremost, Ukraine must complete the integration of the Rome Statute’s provisions into its domestic law, as it provides clear definitions for over forty international crimes—definitions that are currently missing from our legal framework. This gap affects the quality of investigations carried out in Ukraine.
However, a challenge has emerged. In December, Parliament passed two draft laws in their first readings—No. 11538, ‘On Criminal Liability for International Crimes,’ and No. 11539, ‘On Amendments to the Criminal and Criminal Procedure Codes of Ukraine.’ These bills could drastically reshape the landscape, effectively taking us back to 2014 and forcing us to restart legislative development from scratch. Despite opposition from investigators and the Ministry of Justice, Parliament is pressing ahead with these proposals.
I struggle to understand why Ukraine is unable to integrate international law into its domestic legal framework. There seems to be internal resistance that defies all logic. If we fail to act, we risk handling international crimes in much the same way as the Maidan cases—where justice remains elusive, and proceedings drag on endlessly. This could become a source of shame for future generations, especially as Russia will likely claim that these crimes were nothing more than propaganda and that they never happened simply because we failed to investigate them ourselves. I believe the current Ukrainian government underestimates the risks of not investigating international crimes properly, and Ukraine is dangerously close to that failure.
There are also several critical areas that require reform. Take, for example, the treatment of crime victims: the state must provide legal, psychological, and other forms of assistance. This is especially important in cases of sexual violence. Unfortunately, we lack the comprehensive systems that exist in the European Union or those required by the Rome Statute. Again, this is a matter of implementation, and we have yet to get it right.
