Command Responsibility and the War in Ukraine: Can Customary International Law Hold Russian Commanders Accountable for War Crimes?

Currently, neither Ukraine’s Constitution nor its criminal code establish the principle of command responsibility as a mode of criminal liability within the country. Key international statutes like Article 28 of the International Criminal Court and international case law, like the recently decided Case of Milanković v. Croatia, have firmly established the doctrine of command responsibility as a fundamental principle of customary international law applicable in the context of an armed conflict. Furthermore, the Milanković court affirmed a conviction based on command responsibility even in the absence of a clear domestic governing statute at the time the crime was committed, surviving an ex post facto law challenge.\nThis Comment posits that Ukraine should pass legislation to amend their criminal code to provide for command responsibility as a new mode of criminal liability. Ukraine should then use the doctrine of command responsibility to hold Russian commanders accountable for their war crimes committed after the bill’s passage.\nFurthermore, despite its constitutional ban on ex post facto laws, Ukraine can, and should, rely confidently on Milanković and other international precedent to begin prosecuting Russian military commanders under the theory of command responsibility for crimes perpetrated by their subordinates before the new legislation’s passage. Case law suggests command responsibility has been tempore criminis an essential component of customary international law for the entire span of the War in Ukraine, meaning Ukraine can retroactively hold Russian commanders liable for their subordinates’ war crimes even when there was no law on the books.\nAdoption of this principle will provide Ukrainian prosecutors with yet another (and arguably a more appropriate) mode of criminal responsibility to aid them in their pursuit of justice against even the most senior Russian military commanders and mercenary fighters alike for their subordinates’ war crimes committed in the ongoing War in Ukraine.

Publication Details

Journal
eYLS (Yale Law School)
Published
2024-10-01
Primary Topic
Digital Media and Philosophy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Command Responsibility and the War in Ukraine: Can Customary International Law Hold Russian Commanders Accountable for War Crimes?

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Digital Media and Philosophy
article

Command Responsibility and the War in Ukraine: Can Customary International Law Hold Russian Commanders Accountable for War Crimes?

article en

Abstract

Currently, neither Ukraine’s Constitution nor its criminal code establish the principle of command responsibility as a mode of criminal liability within the country. Key international statutes like Article 28 of the International Criminal Court and international case law, like the recently decided Case of Milanković v. Croatia, have firmly established the doctrine of command responsibility as a fundamental principle of customary international law applicable in the context of an armed conflict. Furthermore, the Milanković court affirmed a conviction based on command responsibility even in the absence of a clear domestic governing statute at the time the crime was committed, surviving an ex post facto law challenge.\nThis Comment posits that Ukraine should pass legislation to amend their criminal code to provide for command responsibility as a new mode of criminal liability. Ukraine should then use the doctrine of command responsibility to hold Russian commanders accountable for their war crimes committed after the bill’s passage.\nFurthermore, despite its constitutional ban on ex post facto laws, Ukraine can, and should, rely confidently on Milanković and other international precedent to begin prosecuting Russian military commanders under the theory of command responsibility for crimes perpetrated by their subordinates before the new legislation’s passage. Case law suggests command responsibility has been tempore criminis an essential component of customary international law for the entire span of the War in Ukraine, meaning Ukraine can retroactively hold Russian commanders liable for their subordinates’ war crimes even when there was no law on the books.\nAdoption of this principle will provide Ukrainian prosecutors with yet another (and arguably a more appropriate) mode of criminal responsibility to aid them in their pursuit of justice against even the most senior Russian military commanders and mercenary fighters alike for their subordinates’ war crimes committed in the ongoing War in Ukraine.

eYLS (Yale Law School)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 39%
Digital Media and Philosophy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Command Responsibility and the War in Ukraine: Can Customary International Law Hold Russian Commanders Accountable for War Crimes? · eYLS (Yale Law School) (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS