Russian Aggression Against Ukraine and the Law of Countermeasures
A Momentum for Caution or an Opportunity for Evolution?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5507/Keywords:
sanctions against Russia, confiscation, countermeasures, international investment arbitrationAbstract
The paper addresses some of the challenging legal issues invoked by the response of the part of the international community to the Russian aggression in Ukraine in 2022. These legal issues were selected through the lenses of evolution versus caution paradigm. In particular, it maps the issue of the permissibility of third-party countermeasures, a topic that has already enjoyed attention of the doctrine but is still controversial. It then focuses on the issue of confiscation of frozen Russian assets as a possible form of countermeasure. This issue is addressed through the optics of the human right to private property and briefly also through the lenses of the law on the immunities of States. The paper then addresses a complicated issue of possible claims against sanctions initiated in international investment arbitration. It focuses primarily on the question whether host States can raise the defence of countermeasures in investment arbitration.
References
Literature and electronic sources
AKEHURST, Michael. Reprisals by Third States. [online]. Available at: <http://heinonline.org/HOL/
LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/byrint44&div=4&id=&page=> Accessed: 01.12.2023.
ALEXANDROS-CĂTĂLIN, Bakos, KABIR, Duggal A.N. Economic sanctions in International
Investment Arbitration. [online]. Available at <https://jusmundi.com/en/document/publication/
en-economic-sanctions-in-international-investment-arbitration> Accessed 05.03.2024.
ANDERSON, Scott R., KEITNER, Chimène. The Legal Challenges Presented by Seizing Frozen
Russian Assets. [online]. Available at: <https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/legal-challengespresented-
seizing-frozen-russian-assets> Accessed: 04.01.2024.
BACZYNSKA, Gabriela. No quick EU path to give Ukraine profits on sanctioned Russian assets.
[online]. Available at: <https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/no-quick-eu-path-give-ukraineprofits-
sanctioned-russian-assets-2023-12-08/> Accessed: 04.10.2023.
Belgium may face treaty arbitration over sanctioned Russian assets. [online]. Available at:
www.iareporter.com/articles/belgium-may-face-treaty-arbitration-over-sanctioned-russianassets/>
Accessed 04.03.2024.
BRUNK, Ingrid, Wuerth. Countermeasures and Confiscation of Russian Central Bank Assets. [online].
Available at: <https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/countermeasures-and-the-confiscation-ofrussian-
central-bank-assets> Accessed: 03.03.2024.
BUTLER, Nicolette. The Effect of Unilateral Sanctions on the Foreign Investment Law Regime.
In: SUBEDI, Surya P. (ed). Unilateral Sanctions in International Law. Hart Publishing, 2021,
pp. 161–183.
Canada will transfer confiscated Antonov An-124 from Volga-Dnepr to Ukraine. [online]. Available
at: <https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/canada-will-transfer-confiscated-antonov-an-124-fromvolga-
dnepr-to-ukraine> Accessed: 12.01.2024.
CASSESE, Antonio. International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
CUJO, Eglantine. Invocation of Responsibility by International Organizations. In Crawford, James
(ed). The Law of International Responsibility. New York, 2010, pp. 969–984.
DAWIDOWICZ, Martin. Third-Party Countermeasures in International Law. Cambridge University
Press, 2017.
DAWIDOWICZ, Martin. Third-party countermeasures: A progressive development of international
law? Questions of International Law, 2016, No. 29, pp. 3–15.
DAWIDOWICZ, Martin. Third-party countermeasures. Observations on a controversial concept.
In CHINKIN, Christine, BAETENS, Freya (eds). Sovereignty, Statehood and State Responsibility.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp. 340–362.
ECtHR. Information Note No. 76 on the case-law of the Court (June 2005). [online]. Available at:
www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/CLIN_2005_06_76_ENG_822320> Accessed: 01.10.2023.
EU Policy. Brussels rows back on plan to tax €200 bn in frozen Russian assets. [online]. Available
at: <https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/12/12/brussels-rows-back-on-plan-to-tax-200-
bn-in-frozen-russian-assets> Accessed: 01.12.2023.
EU vyzývá členské státy ke konfiskaci majetku ruských oligarchů. [online]. Available at:
ceskatelevize.cz/svet/3477630-eurokomisar-pro-justici-eu-vyzyva-clenske-staty-ke-konfiskacimajetku-
ruskych-oligarchu> Accessed: 03.03.2024.
European Commission positive on Estonia’s Russian asset seizure initiative. [online]. Available at:
<https://news.err.ee/1608849637/european-commission-positive-on-estonia-s-russian-assetseizure-
initiative> Accessed: 12.01.2024.
European Commission. EU Sanctions map. [online]. Available at: <https://www.sanctionsmap.eu/#/
main> Accessed: 03.03.2024.
GORDON, Richard, John, Francis and others. Sanctions Law. Oxford, Portland: Hart Publishing, 2019.
GRIERSON, Jamie, MASON, Rowena. Property of Russian elites could be handed to Ukrainian
refugees. [online]. 4 March 2022. Available at: <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/
mar/04/property-of-russian-elites-could-be-handed-to-ukrainian-refugees-says-raab> Accessed:
03.2024.
HILLGRUBER, Christian. The Right of Third States to Take Countermeasures. In TOMUSCHAT,
Cristian, THOUVENIN, Jean-Marc (eds). The Fundamental Rules of the International Legal Order.
Brill, 2005, pp. 265–293.
In confiscating frozen Russian assets, Estonia may follow Canadian example. [online]. Available at:
<https://news.err.ee/1608872648/in-confiscating-frozen-russian-assets-estonia-may-followcanadian-
example> Accessed: 12.11.2023.
Justice Department Transfers Approximately $500,000 in Forfeited Russian Funds to Estonia for Benefit
of Ukraine. [online]. Available at: <https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-transfersapproximately-
-forfeited-russian-funds-estonia-benefit> Accessed: 03.03.2024.
KAMMINGA, Menno T. Confiscating Russia´s Frozen Central Bank Assets: A Permissible Third-
Party Countermeasure? Netherlands International Law Review, 2022, vol. 70, pp. 1–17.
KAPLAN, Juliana and others. Congress tees up a plan to seize Russian yachts and properties in the US —
and sell them for Ukraine aid. [online]. Available at: <https://www.businessinsider.com/congressbill-
seize-russian-yachts-sell-for-ukraine-aid-2022-3?r=US&IR=T> Accessed: 03.03.2024.
LOSARI, Junianto, James, EWING-CHOW, Michael. A clash of treaties: The lawfulness of
Countermeasures in International Trade Law and International Investment Law. The Journal of
World Investment & Trade, 2015, vol. 16, pp. 274–313.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic. Three more entities were added to the national
sanction list. [online]. Available at: <https://mzv.gov.cz/jnp/en/issues_and_press/press_releases/
three_more_entities_were_added_to_the.html> Accessed: 12.12.2023.
MOECKLI, Daniel, and others (eds). International Human Rights Law. 3rd ed. Oxford University
Press, 2017.
MOISEIENKO, Anton. Legal: The Freezing of the Russian Central Bank’s Assets. European Journal of
International Law, 2023, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1007–1020.
No quick EU path to give Ukraine profits on sanctioned Russian assets. [online]. Available at:
www.reuters.com/world/europe/no-quick-eu-path-give-ukraine-profits-sanctioned-russianassets-
-12-08/> Accessed: 01.12.2023.
OLMEDO, Javier, Garcia. The Legality of EU Sanctions under International Investment Agreements.
European Foreign Affairs Review, 2023, vol. 28, pp. 95–116.
PALCHETTI, Paolo. Consequences for Third States as a Result of an Unlawful Use of Force.
In WELLER, Marc (ed). The Oxford Handbook on the Use of Force in International Law. Oxford
University Press, 2015, pp. 1224–1238.
PAPARINSKINS, M. Circumstances Precluding Wrongfulness in International Investment Law.
ICSID Review, 2016, vol. 31, pp. 484–503.
PARLETT, Kate. The Application of the rules on countermeasures in investment claims.
In CHINKIN, Christine, BAETENS, Freya (eds). Sovereignty, Statehood and State Responsibility.
Essays in Honour of James Crawford. Cambridge University Press, 2015, pp. 389–405.
PELLET, Alain, MIRON, Alina. Sanctions. [online]. Available at: <https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/
law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e984?prd=MPIL> Accessed: 03.03.2023.
PM: Ukraine prepares for confiscation of Russian assets, receives first 17B. [online]. Available at:
<https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-economy/3677837-pm-ukraine-prepares-for-confiscationof-
russian-assets-receives-first-17b.html> Accessed: 12.12.2023.
ROBERT-CUENDET, Sabrina. Unilateral and extraterritorial sanctions and international investment
law. In BEAUCILLON, Charlotte (ed). Research Handbook on Unilateral and Extraterritorial
Sanctions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2021, pp. 204-220.
Russian firm escalates dispute with Canada over seized cargo plane. [online]. Available at:
cbc.ca/news/politics/russia-antonov-plane-pearson-ukraine-1.6939473> Accessed: 01.11.2023.
RUYS, Tom. Sanctions, retorsions and countermeasures: concepts and international legal framework.
In HERIK, Larissa van den (ed). Research Handbook on UN Sanctions and International Law,
Northampton, 2017, pp. 19–51.
SILVEIRA, Mercédeh, Azeredo, LEVASHOVA, Yulia. Economic Sanctions, Countermeasures and
Investment Claims against the Russian Federation: A Battle on Multiple Fronts. ICSID Review,
, pp. 1–15.
SOUTH KOREA ROUND-UP: LONE STAR FILES FOR ANNULMENT, IRAN’S CENTRAL BANK
TO START ARBITRATION OVER 7+ BILLION USD IN FROZEN ASSETS, AND A LOOK AT THE
IMPACT OF RUSSIA’S INVASION OF UKRAINE ON KOREAN BUSINESS. [online]. Available
at: <https://www.iareporter.com/articles/south-korea-round-up-lone-star-files-for-annulmentirans-
central-bank-to-start-arbitration-over-7-billion-usd-in-frozen-assets-and-a-look-at-theimpact-
of-the-russia-ukraine-war-on-korean/> Accessed: 01.11.2023.
South Korea says Iran’s frozen funds transferred to a third country. [online]. Available at:
<https://www.reuters.com/world/south-korea-says-irans-frozen-funds-transferred-thirdcountry-
-09-18/> Accessed: 01.11.2023.
STEJSKAL, Petr, FAIX, Martin. Sanctions from the Perspective of the Right to Property – Confiscation
of Assets. In ŠTURMA, Pavel (ed). International Sanctions and Human Rights. Springer, 2024,
pp. 155-175.
STEJSKAL, Petr. Sankce v mezinárodním právu ve světle ukrajinské krize – jak fungují, jaké jsou pro
ně podmínky a jak se provádí v ČR. Jurisprudence, 2022, No. 5, pp. 11–25.
STHOEGER, Eran, TAMS, Christian J. Swords, Shields and Other Beasts: The Role of
Countermeasures in Investment Arbitration. ICSID Review, 2022, vol. 37, no. 1–2, pp. 121–137.
ŠTURMA, Pavel. Nesnesitelná lehkost sankcí? Zamyšlení nad aktuálním problémem z pohledu
mezinárodního práva. In Špaček, Metod (ed). Medzinárodné právo jako strážca svetového
pozadku: Vynútiteľnosť medzinárodného práva v 21. storočí. Bratislava: Slovenská spoločnosť pre
medzinárodné právo při SAV, 2014, pp. 51–61.
The Economist. Could seizing Russian assets help rebuild Ukraine? [online]. Available at:
www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/06/06/could-seizing-russian-assets-helprebuild-
ukraine> Accessed: 01.12.2023.
THOUVENIN, Jean-Marc. Gel des fonds des banques centrales et immunité d’exécution.
In PETERS, Anne and others (eds). Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism, 2015,
pp. 209–219.
Tracking sanctions against Russia. [online]. Available at: <https://graphics.reuters.com/UKRAINECRISIS/
SANCTIONS/byvrjenzmve/> Accessed: 14.01.2024.
Two Russian Banks Threaten Treaty Arbitration. [online]. Available at: <https://www.iareporter.com/
articles/two-russian-banks-threaten-treaty-arbitration-against-ukraine-following-seizure-oftheir-
assets-in-the-context-of-the-ongoing-russia-ukraine-war/> Accessed: 12.12.2023.
UN International Law Commission. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally
Wrongful Acts. Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of Its Fifty-third
Session, UN GAOR, 56th Sess., Supp. No. 10, at 43, UN Doc. A/56/10 (2001).
UN International Law Commission. Yearbook of the International Law Commission, Vol. II, Part Two.
Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries, 2001.
[UPDATED] RUSSIAN AIRLINE FILES NOTICE OF DISPUTE OVER CANADA’S DECISION TO
SEIZE AIRCRAFT. [online]. Available at: <https://www.iareporter.com/articles/russian-airlinefiles-
notice-of-dispute-over-canadas-decision-to-seize-aircraft/> Accessed: 01.11.2023.
[UPDATED] RUSSIAN INVESTORS ARE REPORTEDLY CONTEMPLATING TREATY CLAIMS
OVER FREEZING OF THEIR ASSETS HELD BY EUROPEAN CENTRAL SECURITIES
DEPOSITORIES. [online]. Available at: <https://www.iareporter.com/articles/russian-investorsare-
reportedly-contemplating-treaty-claims-over-sanctions-based-freezing-of-their-assets-heldby-
european-central-securities-depositories/> 01.11.2023.
US transfers seized assets from sanctions-hit oligarch to send to Ukraine. [online]. Available at:
www.ft.com/content/ef3501bf-c498-4597-bec3-c284daf9ac2b> Accessed: 03.03.2024.
Věra Jourová at the Czech National TV (ČT24, Otázky Václava Moravce, 22. April 2022.
Available at: <https://www.ceskatelevize.cz/porady/1126672097-otazky-vaclava-moravce/
/>.
ZRILIČ, Jure. Are We in for a New Wave of Investment Arbitrations? Russia’s Measures Against Foreign
Investors and Investment Treaty Implications. [online]. Available at: <https://verfassungsblog.de/
are-we-in-for-a-new-wave-of-investment-arbitrations/> Accessed: 04.02.1992.
Legal documents
Agreement between the Government of Russian Federation and the Government of the Czech
Republic on promotion and protection of foreign investments from 1994.
Accord entre les Gouvernements du Royaume de Belgique et du Grand duché de Luxembourg et le
Governement de l’Union des républiques socialistes soviétiques, concernant l’encouragement et la
protection réciproque des investissements, 1989.
Council Regulation (EU) No. 269/2014 of 17 March 2014 (amended version).
Czech Republic. Act No. 1/2023 Coll., on Restrictive Measures against Certain Serious Conduct
applied in International Relations (Sanctions Act).
Special Economic Measures Act. S. C. 1992, c. 17. The Act is available at: <https://laws-lois.justice.
gc.ca/eng/acts/S-14.5/page-1.html>.
Court decisions
Archer Daniels Midland Company v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/04/05, Award of
November 2007.
Cargill, Inc. v. Mexico, ICSID Case No. ARB(AF)/05/02, Award of 18 September 2009.
Case Concerning United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran (United States of America v.
Iran), ICJ, Judgement, 24 May 1980.
Certain Iranian Assets (Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America), ICJ, Judgement,
March 2023.
ECtHR. Jahn and Others v. Germany, no. 46720/99, 72203/99 and 72552/01, Judgement,
June 2005.
ECtHR. Lithgow and others v. the United Kingdom, no. 9006/80, 9262/81, 9263/81, 9265/81, 9266/81,
/81, 9405/81, Judgement, 8 June 1986.
ECtHR. The Holy Monasteries v. Greece, no. 13092/87; 13984/88, Judgement, 9 December 1994.
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros (Hungary v. Slovakia), ICJ, Judgement, 25 September 1997.
General Court (CJEU), Case T-270/22, Judgement, 6 September 2023.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
