Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 31 January 2023
73. Deputy Willie O'Dea asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he supports calls for a special tribunal to prosecute Russian war crimes in Ukraine; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4334/23]
View answerDoes the Tánaiste support calls for a special tribunal to prosecute Russian war crimes in Ukraine? We touched on this topic in an earlier question. How does the Minister think Ireland should proceed on this question?
I thank the Deputy. In Ukraine last July, I heard first-hand accounts from civilians of the brutality and violence visited upon men, women and children by occupying Russian forces. Where Russia's forces have been pushed back, we have seen wanton destruction and the uncovering of mass civilian graves in towns and villages.
Ireland supports initiatives to bring to account the individual perpetrators of atrocity crimes, including war crimes, committed in Ukraine since Russia's latest invasion of that country in February 2022. Ireland, along with its EU partners, was one of over 40 states to refer the situation in Ukraine to the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, ICC, to pursue accountability for alleged atrocity crimes committed in Ukraine. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide that have been committed on Ukrainian territory since 2013. In March 2022, the prosecutor of the ICC commenced a formal investigation into the situation in Ukraine.
Ukraine is also advocating support for the establishment of a special tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression as it concerns Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Due to the separate jurisdictional regime for the crime of aggression, which is a separate and distinct crime to war crimes under international law, the ICC does not have jurisdiction over the crime of aggression as it relates to events in Ukraine. The establishment of the proposed tribunal seeks to address this impunity gap. Ireland supports the idea of creating a special tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression. However, a number of significant legal and practical challenges must still be resolved before this can happen. In the meantime, we welcome proposals to establish an interim prosecution office to investigate the crime of aggression as an important first step to achieving accountability for this crime.
I believe there is general agreement that there must be full accountability for the individuals responsible for international war crimes in Ukraine. We have all observed Russia's deliberate targeting and killing of civilians, attacks on civilian infrastructure and threat to use nuclear weapons. The question is how we achieve this accountability. Some EU states favour the establishment of a special international tribunal. The European Parliament has passed another resolution along those lines. I do not think we should underestimate the complexity of this matter and the difficulties in gathering evidence and bringing about a prosecution. The Tánaiste said that Ireland favours the establishment of a special international tribunal. Does he also see a role for the ICC? I believe what he has said indicates he does. Is there also a role for the European Court of Human Rights or the International Court of Justice, under the Genocide Convention? There are different international bodies looking at this matter. We need to co-ordinate and decide how best to proceed as a State and within international organisations.
The principle of accountability is very important. At the commencement of and during all wars in the past, accountability has seemed a long way off and appeared an almost unachievable proposition.
We should know from history that accountability can and does happen in the aftermath of terrible wars. We saw that recently in the Balkans. We must pursue those who perpetrate war and engage in the crimes in question. They must know that there will be a day of reckoning or, at the very least, that there could be such a day in the form of international accountability. Along with our EU partners, we have referred the situation in Ukraine to the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC to pursue accountability in respect of alleged atrocities committed in Ukraine. The ICC has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide that have been committed on Ukrainian territory since 2013. In March of last year, the Prosecutor of the ICC commenced a formal investigation into the situation in Ukraine.
I thank the Tánaiste. How will the Russian Federation be made to pay compensation for the damage it has done? Can Russian frozen assets be used for this purpose? This is a complex issue to resolve, but we should, at an EU level, look into it to see how the Russian Federation can be made to pay compensation for the tremendous damage it is doing and that it will no doubt continue to do in the coming months.
Early last year, the Estonian Prime Minister was the first to put forward the idea of utilising Russian assets that have been frozen to facilitate reconstruction in Ukraine. When this suggestion was put forward at the European Council, there was not a big take-up in respect of it. I gave support to Prime Minister Kallas of Estonia and stated that we needed to pursue the matter. Momentum since then has grown significantly, and the proposal put forward is being actively looked at by the European Commission and member states in the context that some frozen assets will be used for reconstruction in Ukraine. The damage there is enormous. Countries that conduct wars that give rise to such savagery and destruction must know that there will be penalties. The resolve of the international community has to be strong, particularly in the aftermath of conflict. It cannot be the same donors all the time that come in and rebuild countries after terrible wars.
