Editor's Column
Golden Collection
Infographics
Experts
MFA Russia News
All Tags
Archive material
November 2019 (12)
October 2019 (24)
September 2019 (20)
August 2019 (26)
July 2019 (25)
June 2019 (25)
rss
facebook
twitter
youtube

The alleged killing of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has brought several crucial issues of international law to the forefront. Though it is evident that many pieces of video footage featuring Gaddafi`s last hours are fake, still there are some which may prove real. It is easy to explain why fake videos have been made: they were aimed to suppress courage in the rebels, and – if we suggest that the video showing Gaddafi`s killing are fake – to prevent a new wave of uprising set for the nearest future.

On September 16, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2009 establishing a “peacekeeping” Support Mission in Libya to be headed by British citizen Ian Martin. The Mission is tasked with helping Libya rebuild its national security, assisting the country in drafting a new constitution, expanding the zone under the control of the civilian administration, advocating human rights, supporting justice, rebuilding the Libyan economy, and coordinating the support for future interactions with other subjects. At the moment, it makes sense to get a glimpse of what all of the above may mean in practice.

The May 26 arrest of former Serbian military leader Gen. R. Mladic evokes serious questions of both moral and legal character. Clearly aware of the shakiness of the indictment Mladic is about to face, the global media tend to avoid touching upon the legal aspect of the Mladic case.

On February 9, the UN Security Council passed a resolution confirming the outcome of the referendum in Sudan which by 98.83% of the vote established its southern part as an independent state. The new country will be officially welcomed to the map of the world on July 9. An array of issues including border demarcation, citizenship, security measures, and assets sharing await resolution in the meantime. 

Formally, the 65th session of the UN General Assembly continues but its part dedicated to serious debates and real decision-making ended in 2010. Though the session will likely convene without any impact on the global state of affairs once or twice before the 66th session opens in September 2011, the time to assess the results of the 65th session of the world's main organization has already come.

The Dayton deal between the warring sides in Bosnia and Herzegovina was sealed fifteen years ago, on December 14, 1995. It marked a novel approach to negotiations which is generally credited to US veteran diplomat Richard C. Holbrooke who died this Monday – the opponents stayed locked up until an agreement was reached. NATO launched air raids against the Bosnian Serbs on the eve of the talks, evidently to show them what alternative to embracing Washington's settlement formula they faced.

On July 22, 2010 the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion on the legality of the unilateral declaration of independence by «the Kosovo administration». The verdict was that the declaration was legal. The ruling, however, gives serious reasons to call into question the legality of the ICJ verdict.
The approach to answering the question confronting the ICJ should have necessarily comprised the following steps. First, the ICJ should have found out which norms of international law had served as the basis for the declaration of the Kosovo independence.

On May 17, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) revealed the long-awaited decision on the Kononov case. It concerns Russia directly not only because Russian citizenship was granted to former Soviet partisan Vasily Kononov in 2000 amid his ordeal in Latvian courts, but, even more so, because the whole case targets not just Kononov, but Russia as a country. Due to the reason, in 2004 Russia got involved in the Kononov case citing its right of a member of the Council of Europe to act as a third party in the ECHR cases affecting its interests.