Sanctions Within International Crimes Norms: Balancing Legality and Justice

Abstract

The issue of criminal liability for international crimes extends far beyond the boundaries of domestic state sovereignty. The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was intended to become a reliable preventive mechanism to ensure stability in international justice and adherence to fundamental international norms. At the same time, the invasion of the russian federation into the territory of Ukraine has become a vivid example of a disdainful attitude towards both declared domestic values and internationally recognized priorities, relations, treaties, and obligations, as well as the historical past and global achievements in the fight against impunity for the most serious human rights violations. In this regard, the ICC acquires particular significance for Ukraine, not only as a means of prevention but also as a punitive mechanism to guarantee the accountability of the perpetrators. Concurrently, numerous questions arise concerning the application of such a complementary mechanism at the national level, which determined the choice of this research topic, specifically the interest in defining the wrongfulness of acts that undermine the international foundations of human coexistence and ensuring their punishability. In light of the requirements for punishing the most serious and large-scale human rights violations, the question always arises: on the one hand, of achieving justice for the victims of heinous crimes, and on the other, of observing the principles of legality and equality for those who committed such atrocities, thus adhering to the principles of the rule of law. Here, the issue of punishment for international crimes acquires a special meaning both in terms of preventive impact and in connection with its other functions, which became the subject of the authors’ analysis in the context of justified demands for the justice of the latter. The article provides a comprehensive analysis of theoretical and applied issues arising in connection with prosecution for international crimes. The research focuses on the limits and sentencing through the prism of both international standards and the requirements of national legislation. Using a predominantly comparative-legal method, based on the analysis of international documents and relevant international and national practice, the authors explore the interaction between the principle of legality (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege) and the principles of justice and proportionality. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the concept of «gravity» in the context of ordinary and international crimes, highlighting the challenges for the legal system of Ukraine in prosecution related to «crimes of concern to the entire international community». Attention is given to the issues of selective justice, mechanisms of differentiation and individualization of liability and punishment, and the significance of sanctions in norms on international crimes, particularly within the context of the ICC’s complementarity approach. Special emphasis is placed on the challenges faced by the Ukrainian legal system during the armed conflict. The authors criticize the practice of «legal simplification», where international crimes are essentially substituted by ordinary ones. The work argues that such a path is a dangerous illusion of efficiency that distorts the very idea of justice and becomes an obstacle to achieving it. In this regard, a critical examination of the phenomenon of «selective justice» is an important aspect, as a different approach to liability for identical acts committed in connection with the same events undermines the foundations of equality and levels the standards of a fair trial for those guilty of international crimes. The methodological basis of the study is a comprehensive combination of general scientific and special legal methods aimed at analysing punishability in connection with international crimes. In addition to the comparative-legal method, which allowed for a comparison of the Rome Statute standards and international case law with national law enforcement, the research was conducted using systemic-structural and formal-dogmatic analysis. Through these, the sanction was studied not only as a means of reflecting punishment but also as a systemic element that essentially determines the legal regime of a crime in connection with several other institutes, particularly regarding statutes of limitations and immunities. The hermeneutic approach was applied in interpreting the categories of gravity and justice through the prism of decisions of international tribunals, and the legal modelling method allowed for the substantiation of unified approaches to liability, which is crucial for the legitimacy of the justice being administered. Thus, the main focus of the article is on the sanction as an instrument that should reflect the real public danger of the committed act, and as a means that promotes the implementation of several other legal guarantees, performing both preventive and retributive functions. In the context of the principles of predictability, other mechanisms for guaranteeing liability for the most serious offenses, such as genocide, aggression, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, are also analysed. Contemporary events indicate that international criminal law must evolve further, and certain approaches require revision in light of the requirements of justice and the inevitability of punishment, which is demonstrably relevant for Ukraine today.