Latvia files Allegations of Genocide re Ukraine v. Russian Federation

Latvia files a declaration of intervention in the proceedings under Article 63 of the Statute

THE HAGUE, 22 July 2022. Genocide – On 21 July 2022, the Republic of Latvia, invoking Article 63 of the Statute of the Court, filed in the Registry of the Court a declaration of intervention in the case concerning Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukraine v. Russian Federation).

Pursuant to Article 63 of the Statute, whenever the construction of a convention to which States other than those concerned in the case are parties is in question, each of these States has the right to intervene in the proceedings. In this case, the construction given by the judgment of the Court will be equally binding upon them.

To avail itself of the right of intervention conferred by Article 63 of the Statute, Latvia relies on its status as a party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the “Genocide Convention”). It states that “[a]s a Party to the Genocide Convention, Latvia has a direct interest in the construction that might be placed upon that treaty in the Court’s decision in the [proceedings”, indicating that it “wishes to intervene in order to make submissions on [the] construction of the Genocide Convention on issues relating to merits as well as jurisdiction”.

In accordance with Article 83 of the Rules of Court, Ukraine and the Russian Federation have been invited to furnish written observations on Latvia’s declaration of intervention.

Latvia’s declaration of intervention will soon be available on the Court’s website.

History of the proceedings

The history of the proceedings can be found in press releases Nos. 2022/4, 2022/6, 2022/7 and 2022/11, available on the Court’s website.

Note. The Court’s press releases are prepared by its Registry for information purposes only and do not constitute official documents.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and began its activities in April 1946. The Court is composed of 15 judges elected for a nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). The Court has a twofold role. first, to settle, in accordance with international law, through judgments which have binding force and are without appeal for the parties concerned, legal disputes submitted to it by States; and, second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and agencies of the system.

Pope Francis to visit Putin: Fuss in Moscow

On July 4, Pope Francis announced that he had the intention to visit Moscow and Kyiv as soon as possible. The head of the Vatican is regularly speaking to Ukrainian President Zelensky but would like to visit Putin before heading toward Kyiv. He believes that he might be the neutral agent that could convince Putin to put an end to the war.

On the other side of the line, in Moscow, there are different reactions to this idea. In the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, most are in favour of such a visit. Even in the Presidential administration, the reaction is pretty positive, and they view this controversial proposal favourably. But that is not the case within the FSB and the military. There, it is another story, and the intervention of Francis is viewed with at least suspicion and more usually with complete reluctance.

The main actor of this diplomatic move is the head of the World Union of Old Believers Leonid Sevastianov. Sevastianov has access to the Pope and is highly considered by him, and is the one whom the Supreme Pontiff would listen to when it comes to Russia. He is also the one lobbying the Presidential administration in Russia, pushing the idea that the Vatican is the only “neutral” State and then the only one in a position to act as a genuine mediator. Leonid Sevastianov is a strong Christian, who strongly believes that his spiritual mission is to do all in his power to put an end to the war.

But the fiercer opposition is coming from the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) Moscow Patriarch Kirill. Kirill is a strong supporter of the war, and justifies it, as several religious leaders in Russia, by the need of protecting the Christian world from the decadent West corrupted by cults and pagans, a message that is embraced by the Kremlin. His biggest fear is to see the Pope coming into his “territory”, preaching for peace. Even before the war, Kirill opposed the coming of the Vatican’s head, and the reason was then clear: Kirill is poorly considered by the believers, and barely attracts none (or very few) when he publicly appears. If Pope Francis would come to Russia, it’s likely that he attracts thousands of Christians to greet him, which would definitely undermine Kirill’s image in the country.

So Kirill is activating his network behind the scene to prevent Sevastianov to succeed, which is not without risk for the latter. Kirill is a former agent of the KGB and does not back off from dirty tricks to reach his goals. Sevastianov, who in fact is a former colleague of Kirill, and worked for years as the director of the St. Gregory the Theologian’s Charity Foundation, the biggest Orthodox Foundation in Moscow founded by Kirill and Metropolitan Hilarion, has recently declared that the support of the Moscow Patriarch to the war was to be considered as heresy, from a religious point of view. That’s no shy statement by far.

Hilarion himself, who was considered the number 2 of the ROC and was the chairman of the Department for External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, has recently been demoted and sent to a small diocese in Hungary. There is no clear interpretation of this demotion: some say that Hilarion was opposed to the war and was punished for that. Others say that Kirill saw him as a threat as he was in a position to replace him as Patriarch, and some say that it is to have him in a better position to lobby for the ROC on the international scene after Kirill has been sanctioned by the UK, and barely avoided the EU sanctions thanks to the last-minute intervention of Viktor Orban, the Prime Minister of Hungary.

Nevertheless, if Sevastianov’s diplomacy is a risky one for himself, it is also a steady one. Sevastianov has kept pushing for it since February, gained the support of the Supreme Pontiff and is now making progress in Moscow. Of course, even if he would succeed in getting Francis to Moscow, the big question is will it have any impact on Vladimir Putin? History will tell.

War: what is it that religions really say about peace?

In a time where peace has become more than the lack of war, war has hit what is considered the “civilized” world, there are few who willingly misinterpret the time, context, and text to justify the killing of other human beings, forgetting all lessons learned from history.

What is religion?

Religion is a social and cultural system that includes predetermined behaviours and rituals, morals, world-views, books, holy locations, prophecies, ethics, and organizations. It connects humans to mystical or spiritual components of the supernatural world. Religion is a combination of religious attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours that can be personal or institutionalized.

The different types of religions

There are many religions in the world, but we will only discuss the six major religions in this text. Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism, Scientology and Hinduism are the 7 of the most known religions. We’ll look at each religion’s scriptural views about peace and the importance thereof.

Buddhism

Buddhism, unlike the first four religions, does not believe in an external God. Buddhists, on the other hand, seek personal enlightenment and adhere to the teachings of Buddha, a former prince who attained enlightenment after renouncing his life of luxury. According to Buddhists, the Four Noble Truths were discovered by Buddha.

Peace, according to Buddhism, is an inner condition of mental tranquillity that flows outward. Attaining a level of inner calm could serve as an example for everyone. Meditation helped Buddha achieve inner serenity, which encouraged him to work for world peace.

Christianity

Photo by Daniele Franchi

Christians adhere to the Christian faith. Christianity is one of the six major faiths. Christians, like Jews and Muslims, believe in one God: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. They study the Bible and attempt to follow Jesus Christ’s teachings. Churches are where the vast majority of Christians worship.

The Old Testament‘s definition of “peace” largely alludes to completeness, total health, and total welfare. It refers to the totality of God’s benefits bestowed on a member of the covenant community.

This is what the Bible says about peace in its verses. “I leave my peace with you; I give you my peace.” I do not give to you as the world does. Don’t let your hearts be worried, and don’t be terrified. “As a result, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, because we have been justified by faith.”

Hinduism

Hinduism, like Buddhism, is an Indian religion that is not monotheistic. Rather, it is based on a set of traditions and beliefs that were not established by a single person.

Hinduism emphasizes the importance of peace. Because of the eschatological implications, peace is not only necessary within oneself in Hinduism, but it is also extremely important to act peacefully toward others.

Islam

Muslims are people who adhere to the Islamic religion. They believe in the power of Allah, the Arabic word for God, which is another monotheistic faith. Muslims adhere to Islam’s five pillars, read the Qur’an, and pray in mosques.

Peace in Islam is defined as submission to Allah’s will through sharia, Allah’s holy and eternal rule, and the expansion of the Dar al-Islam, or ‘House of Islam,’ to encompass the entire globe. In the absence of sharia, there is no peace. Muslims believe that the only way to acquire inner peace is to completely surrender to Allah.

Judaism

The earliest religious group, Judaism, is the first of these world faiths. Jews believe in a single, all-powerful God who has made a specific deal with people, known as a covenant. To thank God for His protection and direction, Jews devote their lives to following God’s laws.

The Hebrew Bible mentions the well-known commandment to “love thy neighbour as thyself,” which is echoed throughout Judaism’s sacred literature. As a matter of fact, one of the primary concepts of Jewish law is the love of peace and the pursuit of peace.

In Judaism, peace is a very important belief. Jews will greet one another with the Hebrew phrase “Shalom,” which means “peace and happiness.” It evokes feelings of happiness and well-being. Within Judaism, peace between man and God, as well as between organizations and individuals, is highly valued and must be practised.

Scientology

The one that is considered probably the newest world religion due to its fast growth is Scientology, founded by American author L. Ron Hubbard, who is very well known also for his secular work in drug rehabilitation, values and education. It is in one of his fiction books (Battlefield Earth) that we find a very interesting call for Peace.

HEAR ME!! Out of a hell of shot and shell,// Out of this chaos of contention,// Let us bring peace to pointless fight.// Why do we court the whore called war?// Why make of Earth a shattered night?// There is no ecstasy in killing.// Love alone can make man willing.// So hear me warriors, hear me mothers.// There is no pay in slaughtered brothers.
Attention, if your sense is fair,// heed that which we now declare.// PEACE! You races far and wide. PEACE!// Abandon your blood-soaked suicide// and now abide in peace!// Echo me!// As in your hearts you yearn for love, not death!// PEACE, we have declared it.// Snarls and strife must be at end!// In peace alone can this Earth mend.// And now find ecstasy in love, love for Earth, for all.// The gods of peace have now spoken.// OBEY!

Sikhism

Sikhism, founded by Guru Nanak, is another religion that believes in a single God. Sikhs believe that there is only one God, who is present everywhere and in all things.

They don’t really believe that war is always sinful, but that it should only be used as a last resort. As Guru Nanak, Guru Arjan, and Guru Tegh Bahadur demonstrated, peaceful techniques include discussion and non-violence.

Conclusion

Religious tolerance is an important component of every peaceful community, and religious freedom is a global human right that all countries must protect. It is critical to respect one’s religion. No one should be judged because it is everyone’s right to worship whatever they believe in.

UKRAINE-Interview: "Schools should be on the frontline of the full integration"

Interview: How I welcomed refugees – “Schools should be on the frontline of the full integration” – An interview with a teacher of a secondary school in Lisbon who gave asylum to a family of seven Ukrainian refugees. How easy (or difficult) is it to welcome a family of refugees? What can we do to help Ukrainian refugees? This interview adds perspective on the attitude of Europeans towards the Ukraine crisis, and the subsequent refugee crisis.

Is it possible for you to describe your action (the asylum of seven Ukrainian refugees)? 

A friend of a friend of a friend knew I had an empty house and I was willing to receive refugees coming from Ukraine. She got in touch with me, sent me Kateryna’s phone number. I called her, and a few days later, I showed her the house and made plans for cleaning, new furniture, internet connection, and so on…

How did you give shelter to them? Did you cooperate with any institutions? 

I did not contact any institution (although I already knew about the platform We Help Ukraine and was considering registering as willing to give help). I am now searching for the proper way to register the aid I’m giving just for security purposes (as I think it is important to know where the refugees are being lodged, who is in charge, what help is being provided, and so on).

What was the origin of your action? 

The origins of the action are diverse: I had a free house; a friend (of a friend of a friend) knew a family that had just arrived from Ukraine and needed a place to stay; I consider it a moral obligation to help if one has the chance to do it without any relevant cost associated.

What do you think other people can do for Ukrainians? 

 I think there is a lot that can be done regarding the thousands of Ukrainians fleeing the war, both as individuals (citizens) and as states. As individuals, we can volunteer for help (with shelter, food, medical supplies and other commodities, help in their integration, with legal assistance or training in education, for instance with the Portuguese, etc.), and as states, we should further sanction Russian interests, help during wartime (mainly with humanitarian help) and in the reconstruction of the country as soon as the war is over (hopefully soon).

Schools should be on the frontline of the full integration of these Ukrainians in our country, and I sincerely hope we will rise to the challenge – students, teachers and the government. In September, we must be ready to welcome all children into our school system, if needed with Ukrainian interpreters, and give them the conditions not to lose yet another indispensable feature of their development. Having, for now, lost the chance to grow in peace where they were born, where their relatives and friends live(d) and where their memories still are, it’s important that they don’t lose the possibility to study, to practice their skills, music, sports, or whatever their interests may be, play, make friends, and so on. of these Ukrainians in our country, and I sincerely hope we will rise to the challenge – students, teachers and the government. In September, we must be ready to welcome all children into our school system, if needed with Ukrainian interpreters, and give them the conditions not to lose yet another indispensable feature of their development. Having, for now, lost the chance to grow in peace where they were born, where their relatives and friends live(d) and where their memories still are, it’s important that they don’t lose the possibility to study, to practice their skills, music, sports, or whatever their interests may be, play, make friends, and so on.

Apart from individual help and the legal framework provided by the government (among other initiatives, we should commend the decision of an expeditious “legalization” of these fellow Europeans), I think that some major companies should also have a role to play. For instance, in order to provide my guests with internet service, I am still subject to a 2 year loyalty period (or an initial fee of 400 euros) and I have not seen any package offered by any telecom company that offers any special conditions to people that must be very dependent on good internet access to keep in touch with those they left behind or to guide and adapt themselves to a new country, a new language, different habits, and so on.

I will add a more personal reflection to what I’ve said, which makes me feel quite uncomfortable: I wonder if there is an element of racism in the abysmal difference between our commitment to the Ukrainian refugees and the previous wave of refugees coming from North Africa, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. And my discomfort rests on the assumption that there is no moral or philosophical background that can justify discrimination on the basis of national borders, the colour of skin, or cultural and religious identity. So the issue isn’t so much that we aren’t doing the right thing–we are!–but rather whether we are consistent and courageous enough to foster an attitude of universal hospitality.

Can you describe the contact that you have with the family? 

I’ve been keeping regular contact as we’ve been adapting the house (long closed) to a new large family. I’ve also offered my help with legal issues, job opportunities, and learning Portuguese (they are now having daily classes in a Portuguese school between 6 pm and 10 pm). Although I kept regular contact and visits, I also wanted to give them their space and a sense of autonomy and efficiency (so whatever they could do by themselves, and if they preferred to do it themselves, I chose to “withdraw”). 

My main criterion has been: were I in their place (hard to imagine…), what would I prefer? And even though slavs can be very different from Latins, they too love their children, thrive for peace and prosperity, value friendship, honesty and justice, etc. (By the way, I’ve often remembered in these weeks the motto from the sixties  “Justice, not charity”, which I think we should all keep in mind in the current scenario).

How do you view your action? What do you think about helping a family going through such a difficult time? 

I have no special views on my own actions. I just thought it was the right thing to do. I could easily do it. There is nothing else worth mentioning about it. Those who decided to stay and fight, as well as those who decided to flee and face the dangers of the journey, were brave. My choice was, by comparison, very easy. 

My main concern has been to make them feel like guests rather than refugees and to make them feel safe – in a foreign country, with hosts they don’t know (yet!) and a language they can’t speak nor understand (yet!). So far, I think I succeeded in making them feel at ease, and I just hope their welcome is a way to find the peace that, for the time being, they are not able to find at home.