UN General Assembly and International Criminal Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression Against Ukraine

It is not too soon to consider the role of accountability, particularly criminal accountability, in peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.

The increasingly polarized debate over the tribunal’s institutional design – international or hybrid – goes to the heart, and core purpose, of international criminal justice,…

The agenda for this year's United Nations General Assembly will focus on the Russia-Ukraine war and international development.

Joining the show to discuss what we expect from this year’s U.N. General Assembly meetings is Crisis Group's U.N. Director Richard Gowan.

Despite a tendency to analyze global divisions over aggression trials through a “West” versus “Global South” binary, the longer-term stakes of accountability for Ukraine…

Lithuanian Vice-Minister of Justice writes about the U.S. approach to creating a tribunal compared to the model supported by Lithuania and others.

It is our moral obligation to fight impunity and go after international criminals. It also makes sense politically, as only full accountability can pave the way towards a just…

President Zelenskyy opposes a “hybrid” tribunal to try the crime of aggression—but can the U.N. create a court without Security Council support?

When it comes to doing the right thing and pursuing the rule of law, the form a tribunal takes should not dictate its ability to function:

Whatever shape an aggression tribunal takes, we applaud the U.S. position which will likely create momentum to prosecute Russian aggression.

Praise but also a critique of the new U.S. position.

Founding Prosecutor of International Criminal Court writes about how the Court can be used to help in negotiating an end to the Ukraine war.