New @opiniojuris.bsky.social: my long analysis of the #STCoA Statute -- the good, the bad, the curious, and the terrible. Thoughts welcome! #Ukraine #Russia #Aggression opiniojuris.org/2025/07/11/t...
“There is hereby established the Special Tribunal to investigate, prosecute and try persons
who bear the greatest responsibility for the crime of #aggression against #Ukraine.” #STCoA
#CoE Committee of Ministers backs #STCoA. “Member states have chosen to establish the Special Tribunal within the framework of the Council of Europe. Now it is up to them to follow through … . Funding for the Tribunal must also be secured.” #aggression against #Ukraine
We underline that once established, in accordance with its Statute, the #SpecialTribunal will conduct its proceedings in full respect of international law and human rights, with the aim of securing accountability for the crime of #aggression and strengthening the international legal order. #STCoA
Special Tribunal to prosecute the crime of #aggression committed against #Ukraine on track. Following endorsement by foreign ministers of the #coregroup, it will be established by treaties in the framework of the Council of Europe. #STCoA #CoE
That analysis presumes, of course, that the #STCoA cannot be considered an "international tribunal" for purposes of Arrest Warrant. But I think that's a safe assumption -- most of the states involved in creating it certainly seem to think it is will be internationalized, not international.
That said, I imagine a Russian suspect would argue that publicly releasing an indictment would make it more likely states would issue arrest warrants sua sponte -- at least those with universal jurisdiction over aggression. That would bring the #STCoA approach closer to transgressing Arrest Warrant.
If this is accurate, the #STCoA will take an unprecedented approach to personal immunity. The tribunal would not be able to confirm charges against a member of the troika, but the Prosecutor would be able to investigate and draw up an indictment.
Perhaps the European officials are assuming Putin would no longer be in power if the #STCoA could try him in person -- in which case he would no longer have personal immunity. That's the only way to make legal sense of the supposed in absentia/in person distinction.
This is an odd, and likely inaccurate, article. It suggests the #STCoA will recognise personal immunity for in absentia trials but not for in person ones. That makes no legal sense. Any trial would violate the troika's personal immunity, per the ICJ in Arrest Warrant.
With contributions on #ICC #aggression review (C #Kress), #STCoA for #Ukraine (J #Trahan), #CaH treaty (@leilasadat1.bsky.social @akilarad.bsky.social @cahinitiative.bsky.social), #Palestine (@astridcoracini.bsky.social) with a foreword by Ch #Wenaweser (@liechtensteinun.bsky.social).