Shrouding vice in virtue, a trojan horse in the international legal order? Exploring Russian interpretations of international legal norms and its (dis)engagement with international judicial bodies

Of late, the Russian Federation’s (Russia) expansionist ambitions have been on clear display. From its violation of the territorial integrity of its neighbours such as Georgia and Ukraine by portraying its military interventions as humanitarian missions aimed at preventing persecution, Russia has repeatedly invoked international legal norms to justify its otherwise questionable actions. While being wed to the notion of its own inviolable sovereignty, it has initiated ‘special military operation[s]’ on and occupied the territories of neighbouring states. In doing so, it has made reference to self-defence, intentions of preventing genocide and invoked the principle of responsibility to protect (R2P). Simultaneously, Russian involvement in the conflicts in both Georgia and Ukraine has been criticized for its violation of international legal norms and has been marred by repeated allegations of the commission of international atrocity crimes by Russian and pro-Russian forces in the two countries. When its actions have been questioned, Russia has adopted an antagonistic stance towards international judicial institutions. In terms of the International Criminal
Court (ICC), its interactions have deteriorated resulting in accusations of the Court’s inefficacy and partiality, leading to eventual non-cooperation and disengagement with the Court. Similarly, in terms of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), its stance has evolved from one of engagement to one of disengagement.

Russia’s unique approach to the interpretation of international law has emerged as a nascent topic of discussion. However, how this aspect intersects and interacts with its attitudes towards international courts such as the ICC and ICJ and the wider resonance of such aspects for the rules-based international legal order, deserves further attention. Exploring Russia’s engagement and disengagement with international legal norms and institutions, this paper attempts to delve into the potential consequences of Russia’s actions
on the wider international legal arena. In doing so, the paper inspects whether Russian actions and its position as a traditional heavyweight in the global geopolitical sphere is paving the way for creating fissures in and impacting the utility of the traditional avenues for justice and accountability. It further analyses whether Russian actions are paving the way for an East-West divide in the interpretation of international law and in cooperating with international legal institutions such as the ICC and ICJ.