ON THE JURISDICTION AND PRACTICE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT IN CASES OF WAR CRIMES THROUGH THE PRISM OF THE ARMED CONFLICT IN UKRAINE: CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to provide a comprehensive scientific and legal analysis of the jurisdiction and
practice of the International Criminal Court in cases concerning international crimes, as well as to assess the
effectiveness of its activities in the context of the armed conflict in Ukraine, taking into account current challenges
and prospects for the development of international criminal justice. The methodology of the research is based on
a combination of general scientific and special legal methods. The dialectical method was used to examine the legal
nature and evolution of international criminal justice. The formal legal method enabled the analysis of
international legal norms, in particular the provisions of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and the determination of the scope of its jurisdiction. The system-structural method was applied to study the
institutional framework and procedural activities of the ICC. The methods of analysis and synthesis made it
possible to generalize the Court’s practice and formulate conclusions regarding its effectiveness. The historical-
legal method was used to explore the development of international criminal justice. The formal-logical method
was employed in formulating conclusions and scientific generalizations. In addition, the case study method
facilitated the analysis of specific ICC cases in order to identify practical issues and trends in its activities. The
results of the research indicate that the exercise of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in cases
related to the armed conflict in Ukraine is characterized by an intensification of investigations into international
crimes and an expansion of the practice of prosecuting war crimes and crimes against humanity. It has been
established that the effectiveness of the Court largely depends on the level of cooperation of states, particularly in
the execution of arrest warrants and the collection of evidence. It has been found that key challenges in the
functioning of the ICC include the length of proceedings, the complexity of evidence-gathering in conditions of
armed conflict, and the limited mechanisms for enforcing the Court’s decisions. At the same time, it has been
determined that the ICC’s practice regarding Ukraine contributes to the formation of an evidentiary basis for
international crimes and has a significant impact on the development of mechanisms of international criminal
responsibility. The scientific novelty of the research lies in a comprehensive analysis of the jurisdiction and practice
of the International Criminal Court through the prism of the contemporary armed conflict in Ukraine. The study
clarifies the specific features of the implementation of the ICC’s complementary jurisdiction under conditions of
limited effectiveness of national justice mechanisms, and identifies the particularities of international criminal
prosecution for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the context of active hostilities. Scientific approaches
to assessing the effectiveness of the ICC have been improved through a combination of analysis of the normative
framework and judicial practice, which made it possible to identify key institutional limitations of the Court, in
particular its dependence on international cooperation and the complexity of enforcing its decisions. Further
development has been given to provisions regarding the role of the ICC as a tool for combating impunity and
forming an evidentiary basis for international crimes in the context of Ukraine. The practical significance of the
obtained results lies in the possibility of their use in the law enforcement activities of Ukrainian public authorities,
particularly in cooperation with the International Criminal Court, the documentation of international crimes, and
ensuring the prosecution of those responsible. The findings may be used to improve national legislation in the field
of implementation of international criminal and humanitarian law norms. In addition, the results of the study can
be applied in research activities, in the educational process of higher legal education institutions, and in the
preparation of analytical materials and recommendations aimed at increasing the effectiveness of international
criminal justice in situations of armed conflict.

References

1. Berezniak, V. (2022). Shchodo osoblyvostei yurysdyktsii Mizhnarodnoho kryminalnoho sudu:

analiz okremykh polozhen Rymskoho statutu [On the Specifics of the Jurisdiction of the International

Criminal Court: An Analysis of Selected Provisions of the Rome Statute]. Naukovyi visnyk

Dnipropetrovskoho derzhavnoho universytetu vnutrishnikh sprav. 2022. № 1. P. 155-160. DOI:

10.31733/2078-3566-2022-1-155-160 [in Ukrainian].

2. Passas, N. (2003). International Crimes. 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315092591 [in

English].

3. Hutnyk, V.V. (2024). Mizhnarodnyi kryminalnyi sud: suchasni problemy ta shliakhy yikh

vyrishennia [The International Criminal Court: Current Challenges and Solutions]. Naukovyi visnyk

Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Issue 81, Part 3. P. 251-257. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2024.81.3.37 [in Ukrainian].

4. Arsanjani, M. H., Reisman W. M. (2005). The Law-in-Action of the International Criminal Court.

American Journal of International Law. Vol. 99, Issue 2. P. 385-403. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2307/1562504 [in English].

5. Ainley, K. (2011). The International Criminal Court on trial. Cambridge Review of International

Affairs. Vol. 24, Issue 3. P. 309-333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2011.558051 [in English].

6. Hyeran, J., Simmons, B. A. (2016). Can the International Criminal Court Deter Atrocity?

International Organization. Vol. 70, Issue 3. P. 443-475. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818316000114 [in English].

7. Nouwen, S. M. H., Werner, W. G. (2010). Doing Justice to the Political: The International Criminal

Court in Uganda and Sudan. European Journal of International Law. Vol. 21, Issue 4. P. 941-965. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chq064 [in English].

8. Kevin Jon Heller. (2016) Radical Complementarity. Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol.

14, Issue 3, P.637-665. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqw020 [in English].

9. Bekou, O. (2013) Complementarity Principle. Oxford Bibliographies in International Law. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199796953-0071.

10. Robinson, D. (2010) The Mysterious Mysteriousness of Complementarity. Criminal Law Forum.

Vol. 21. № 1. URL: surl.li/vpyxao [in English].

11. Starenkyi, O.S. (2025) Dokazuvannia mizhnarodnykh zlochyniv u konteksti realizatsii pryntsypu

komplementarnosti Rymskoho statutu Mizhnarodnoho kryminalnoho sudu v Ukraini [Proving

International Crimes in the Context of Implementing the Principle of Complementarity of the Rome Statute

of the International Criminal Court in Ukraine]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho Natsionalnoho

Universytetu. Vyp. 91. Ch. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2025.91.4.61 [in Ukrainian].

12. Gutnyk, V. (2023). The Development of International Criminal Justice: Expectations and Reality.

Teisė. Vol. 126. P. 101-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Teise.2023.126.7 [in English].

13. Tarasenko, L. B. (2023). Ratyfikatsiia Rymskoho statutu Ukrainoiu: aktualnist ta naslidky. Pravova

systema derzhavy: problemy formuvannia ta perspektyvy rozvytku v konteksti yevrointehratsii [Ukraine’s

Ratification of the Rome Statute: Relevance and Implications. The State’s Legal System: Challenges in Its

Formation and Prospects for Development in the Context of European Integration]. Odesa, P. 86-90. URL:

https://surl.li/mweggd (data zvernennia 25.04.2026) [in Ukrainian].

14. Smyrnov, M. (2022). Spivrobitnytstvo Ukrainy z Mizhnarodnym kryminalnym sudom yak

mekhanizm prytiahnennia do vidpovidalnosti rosii za zlochyn ahresii proty Ukrainy [Ukraine’s cooperation

with the International Criminal Court as a mechanism for holding russia accountable for the crime of

aggression against Ukraine]. Prykarpatskyi yurydychnyi visnyk. № 6. P. 227-231 [in Ukrainian].

15. Fokin, Ya. F. (2024). Vidpovidalnist za porushennia norm mizhnarodnoho humanitarnoho prava

pid chas rosiiskoi viiskovoi ahresii [Accountability for violations of international humanitarian law during

russia’s military aggression: the International Criminal Court as a mechanism for holding russia

accountable]. Irpinskyi yurydychnyi chasopys. Issue 4 (17). P.290-299 [in Ukrainian].

16. Riiben, V. (2003). The Procedure of the ICC: Status and Functions of the Prosecutor. Max Planck

Yearbook of United Nations Law. № 7. P. 514-552 [in English].

17. Pylypenko, V. P. (2024). Voienni zlochyny za Rymskym statutom Mizhnarodnoho kryminalnoho

sudu: pytannia teorii ta praktyky [War Crimes Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court:

Issues of Theory and Practice]: Doctor’s thesis. Odesa, 465 p. [in Ukrainian].

18. Andreas Zimmermann. (2016). Finally … Or Would Rather Less Have Been More? The Recent

Amendment on the Deletion of Article 124 of the Rome Statute and the Continued Quest for the Universality

of the International Criminal Court. Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol. 14. Issue 3. P. 505-517.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqw012 [in English].