## Facts

- Ukraine and the Russian Federation are parties to the Genocide Convention and to the Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
- On February 24, 2022, Russia began large-scale military operations in Ukraine.
- Russia publicly asserted that Ukraine was committing genocide against Russian-speaking populations in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions and invoked genocide-prevention rationales for its military action.
- Ukraine denied that genocide occurred in those regions and alleged Russia was using the Genocide Convention as a pretext for military action.
- On February 26, 2022, Ukraine instituted proceedings under Article IX of the Genocide Convention and requested provisional measures, including immediate suspension of Russian military operations.
- The ICJ held a hearing on March 7, 2022; Russia did not appear but sent a written communication contesting jurisdiction and the propriety of the proceedings.
- On March 16, 2022, the ICJ issued an order indicating provisional measures; it addressed only interim relief and not the merits.

## Issues

1. Whether the ICJ had prima facie jurisdiction under Article IX of the Genocide Convention based on a dispute concerning the Convention’s interpretation, application, or fulfillment.
2. Whether Ukraine asserted plausible rights under the Genocide Convention and whether there was a sufficient link between those rights and the requested provisional measures.
3. Whether there was a real and imminent risk of irreparable prejudice to the claimed rights, establishing urgency for provisional measures.
4. Whether measures were warranted requiring both parties to refrain from aggravating or extending the dispute.

## Decision

- The ICJ (13–2) ordered Russia to immediately suspend the military operations commenced on February 24, 2022 in Ukraine.
- The ICJ (13–2) ordered Russia to ensure that any military or irregular armed units directed or supported by it, and any organizations or persons subject to its control or direction, take no steps in furtherance of those military operations.
- The ICJ (unanimously) ordered both parties to refrain from any action that might aggravate or extend the dispute or make it more difficult to resolve.
- Two judges dissented from the principal operative measures, disputing, in substance, the jurisdictional and remedial basis at the provisional-measures stage.

## Legal Principles

- At the provisional-measures stage, the ICJ determines whether it has prima facie jurisdiction, whether the rights asserted are plausible and linked to the requested measures, and whether irreparable prejudice and urgency are shown.
- A dispute under Article IX may exist where one state invokes the Genocide Convention to justify conduct and the other state denies both the factual premise (genocide) and the legality of that reliance under the Convention.
- For provisional measures, the ICJ need not decide whether genocide occurred; it assesses whether treaty-based rights asserted under the Convention are plausible pending a merits determination.
- The Genocide Convention was not designed to authorize a contracting party to use force on the territory of another state to prevent or punish an alleged genocide.
- Non-aggravation orders may be indicated to preserve the integrity of the proceedings and prevent expansion of the dispute while the case is pending.

## Conclusion

The ICJ found prima facie jurisdiction under Article IX and held that Ukraine had plausible Genocide Convention rights threatened by ongoing hostilities, warranting urgent provisional measures ordering Russia to suspend military operations, restrain Russia-directed forces, and requiring both states to avoid aggravating the dispute pending final judgment.


Allegations of Genocide (Ukr. v. Russ.), Provisional Measures, 2022 I.C.J. 211 (Mar. 16)