European court holds Russia accountable for MH17 disaster and Ukraine violations

In a significant ruling, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) addressed the long-standing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, stemming from the full-scale invasion starting in 2022. The court found that Russia had violated international law in various human rights abuses related to the ongoing war. This marked the first time an international court has specifically attributed responsibility to Moscow for the human rights violations occurring since the conflict escalated. The judges ruled on four cases brought by Ukraine and the Netherlands, which additionally included the infamous 2014 downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, resulting in 298 fatalities, including a large number of Dutch citizens. Families of the MH17 victims saw the decision as pivotal in their pursuit of justice, with Thomas Schansman, a victim's relative, emphasizing the importance of understanding accountability in the tragedy. The court's rulings further reaffirmed Ukraine's challenges regarding jurisdiction, finding sufficient evidence that areas in eastern Ukraine, controlled by separatist rebels, fell under Russian jurisdiction, which included provisioning of arms and support to these factions. While the ECHR's decisions were largely symbolic due to Moscow's prior expulsion from the Council of Europe, they nevertheless underscored a condemnation of Russia's actions in Ukraine, amounting to what the court described as widespread and flagrant human rights violations over more than eight years. Notably, the ruling allows for the continuation of legal actions related to Russia's actions prior to its expulsion, including around 10,000 cases lodged by individuals against the Russian state currently pending at the court. The ECHR's findings on the downing of Flight MH17 add to growing international pressure and accountability measures against Russian officials and military strategies. Additionally, the United Nations previously ordered Russia to cease military operations while cases were evaluated, although compliance has been lacking, suggesting a complicated international legal landscape involving Russia. Looking beyond these rulings, other significant issues continue to surface regarding potential kidnapping and atrocities committed during the conflict, as asserted in additional cases pending in front of the court. The intent to establish a separate international court to pursue accountability measures for Russian officials further illustrates the international commitment to address the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, signaling that these discussions and judgments will likely be fundamental for future international law concerning wartime conduct.