Dokumentation: Untersuchungen des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs zur Annexion der Krim | Ukraine-Analysen | bpb.de

Die Ukraine hat im April 2014 die Zuständigkeit des Internationalen Strafgerichtshof für vermutete Straftaten im Zeitraum vom 21. November 2013 bis zum 22. Februar 2014 akzeptiert. Der Zeitraum wurde im September 2015 von der ukrainischen Seite unbefristet verlängert.

Die Ermittlungsbehörden des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs nahmen Untersuchungen zu drei Kontexten auf: Gewaltanwendungen bei den EuroMaidan-Protesten sowie die Annexion der Krim und der militärische Konflikt in der Ostukraine.

Am 14. November 2016 hat der Internationale Strafgerichtshof einen Bericht über vorbereitende Ermittlungen veröffentlicht, der auch die Ermittlungen in der Ukraine beschreibt. Wir dokumentieren im Folgenden den Originaltext zur Einschätzung der Annexion der Krim.

Die Redaktion der Ukraine-Analysen

154. In situations involving crimes allegedly committed in the context of armed hostilities, an assessment of the Court’s jurisdiction entails analysis of whether the alleged crimes occurred in the context of an international or a non-international armed conflict. With regard to the situation in Ukraine the Office is therefore required to undertake a detailed factual and legal assessment of the relevant events, including analysis of the applicability of the law of armed conflict to the situation in Ukraine from 20 February 2014 onwards in order to determine whether there is a reasonable basis to open an investigation into the situation.

155. Beginning in the last days of February 2014, protests against the new Kyiv Government began to build, notably in eastern regions of the country and in Simferopol, the capital of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. On 27 February 2014, reportedly armed and mostly uniformed individuals wearing no identifying insignia seized control of government buildings in Simferopol, including the Crimean parliament building. The same day, in the presence of armed men, the Crimean regional parliament reportedly decided to appoint a new prime minister and hold a referendum on the status of Crimea. The Russian Federation later admitted that its military personnel had been involved in taking control of the Crimean peninsula, justifying the intervention inter alia on the basis of alleged threats to citizens of the Russian Federation, the alleged decision of residents of Crimea to join the Russian Federation and an alleged request for Russian intervention by (former) President Yanukovych, whom the Russian Federation considered to remain the legitimate leader of Ukraine.

156. The incorporation of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol into the Russian Federation was announced on 18 March 2014, following a referendum held two days earlier that was declared invalid by the interim Ukrainian Government and by a majority of States of the UN General Assembly. Following the signing of the "Treaty on the Adoption of the Republic of Crimea into Russia”, between the Crimean de facto authorities and the Russian Federation, on 20 March the Russian State Duma passed a law "On the Acceptance of the Republic of Crimea into the Russian Federation and the Creation of New Federal Subjects”, paving the way for the application of Russian legislation and policy to Crimea. As a consequence, Crimean residents were automatically declared Russian citizens, while those wishing to retain Ukrainian citizenship were required to notify the authorities within a one-month deadline.

157. The assumption of control over Crimea by the Russian Federation occurred for the most part without exchange of fire. Russian military personnel were used to establish control over the territory, including Ukrainian military installations and government buildings, and in mid-March the Ukrainian Government began withdrawing its troops stationed in bases in Crimea to the mainland.

158. The information available suggests that the situation within the territory of Crimea and Sevastopol amounts to an international armed conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. This international armed conflict began at the latest on 26 February when the Russian Federation deployed members of its armed forces to gain control over parts of the Ukrainian territory without the consent of the Ukrainian Government. The law of international armed conflict would continue to apply after 18 March 2014 to the extent that the situation within the territory of Crimea and Sevastopol factually amounts to an on-going state of occupation. A determination of whether or not the initial intervention which led to the occupation is considered lawful or not is not required. For purposes of the Rome Statute an armed conflict may be international in nature if one or more States partially or totally occupies the territory of another State, whether or not the occupation meets with armed resistance.

[…]

171. The following summary of alleged crimes is preliminary in nature and is based on publicly available reports and information received by the Office. The descriptions below are without prejudice to the identification of any further alleged crimes which may be made by the Office in the course of its analysis, and should not be taken as indicative of or implying any particular legal qualifications or factual determinations regarding the alleged conduct.

172. Harassment of Crimean Tatar population: Since the assumption of control by the Russian Federation over the territory of Crimea some 19,000 residents of the region have reportedly become internally displaced within mainland Ukraine. A large proportion of this number of internally displaced persons is believed to be of Crimean Tatar ethnicity. Under the application of Russian law throughout the territory, members of the Crimean Tatar population and other Muslims residents in Crimea have also reportedly been subjected to harassment or intimidation, including a variety of measures such as entry bans to the territory, house searches, and restrictions on their freedom of expression, assembly and association.

173. Killing and abduction: At least 10 people have been reported missing since March 2014 in the context of the situation in Crimea. In most instances the alleged victims were known to oppose the occupation of Crimea and their abductions were attributed to the "Crimean self-defence” paramilitary group. The Office is also analysing two incidents of alleged abduction and killing of Crimean Tatar activists, in March and September of 2014.

174. Ill-treatment: Several incidents of alleged ill-treatment in the context of detention or abduction were also reported, including beatings, choking, and, in at least one instance, threats of sexual violence.

175. Detention and fair trial: A number of civilians who opposed the 16 March referendum have reportedly been arrested and held in detention since March 2014 with information available pointing to the non-respect of a number of due process and fair trial rights. Some 179 persons deprived of their liberty have reportedly been forcibly transferred from prisons in Crimea to prisons in the territory of the Russian Federation.

176. Compelled military service: As a consequence of the imposed change of citizenship, men of conscription age residing in Crimea became subject to mandatory Russian military service requirements. There were reports of a number of young men leaving for mainland Ukraine to escape forced conscription notices from de facto authorities.

Quelle: International Criminal Court: Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2016, 14 November 2016, S. 34–36, 38–39, im Internet veröffentlicht unter: Externer Link: www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/161114-otp-rep-PE_ENG.pdf