DISINFO: The ICJ refused to recognise Russia as an aggressor state

DISINFORMATION CASE DETAILS

DISINFO: The ICJ refused to recognise Russia as an aggressor state

SUMMARY

The International Court of Justice refused to follow Kyiv's lead and recognise the Russian Federation as an aggressor state. The UN court also rejected Ukrainian insinuations that the DPR and LPR are allegedly terrorist organisations.

RESPONSE

A pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the International Court of Justice rule on Ukraine’s lawsuit against Russia. This disinformation claim emerged in the context of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Pro-Kremlin propaganda outlets misrepresent and manipulate the International Court of Justice decision published on 31 January 2024, presenting it as if the court ruled against recognising Russia as an aggressor state and against declaring the occupied so-called Donetsk and Luhansk Republics as terrorist organisations.

The decision of the main legal body of the United Nations was published regarding the lawsuit filed by Ukraine in 2017, which related to Russia's violation of two international agreements. These are the "International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism" (ICSFT) and the "International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination" (CERD).

The court's decision emphasises that the situation in Ukraine today is significantly different from what it was at the time the lawsuit was filed. This is a reference to the fact that Russia in 24 February 2022 launched an open full-scale invasion against Ukraine.

However, the court is limited to considering the issue solely in relation to the two mentioned conventions: the "International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism" (ICSFT) and the "International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination" (CERD).

The decision also clarifies that within the framework of this lawsuit, filed in 2017, Ukraine did not request the court to address the issues of aggression and illegal occupation by Russia, nor did it seek a discussion on the status of the Crimean Peninsula.

Consequently, the court did not cover these topics. Thus, claims that the International Court of Justice refused to recognise Russia as an aggressor state are misleading. Importantly, the court did not consider whether the so-called occupied Donetsk and Luhansk territories are terrorist organisations, nor did it evaluate whether the acts committed by them were terrorist acts.

Read the full debunk at Myth Detector.

Read similar disinformation cases claiming that The ICJ has effectively sided with Russia in the case of the MH17 crash, that Kyiv curators pressure International Court of Justice against Russia in genocide claim, that International Court of Justice has no jurisdiction over war in the Donbas and the annexation of the Crimea, or that The International Court of Justice has already designated Moscow as "guilty".

Disclaimer

Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

    %s

      Your opinion matters!

      Data Protection Information *

        Subscribe to the Disinfo Review

        Your weekly update on pro-Kremlin disinformation

        Data Protection Information *

        The Disinformation Review is sent through Mailchimp.com. See Mailchimp’s privacy policy and find out more on how EEAS protects your personal data.

        🎵 Playlist