This scholarly article addresses two pressing issues that have emerged following Ukraine’s ratification of the Rome Statute, both of which have direct implications for the country’s future cooperation with the International Criminal Court.The first part of the study examines Ukraine’s reference to Article 124 of the Rome Statute during the ratification process. This provision allows a state joining the Statute to limit the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over war crimes committed by its nationals or on its territory for a period of seven years. The analysis establishes that, in practice, such a reference contradicts Ukraine’s previous declarations recognizing the Court’s jurisdiction, particularly the resolution adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in 2015, which has an indefinite duration. Additionally, after reviewing current interpretations of Article 124, the study supports the position of scholars who argue that the reservation cannot be applied in a truncated form, as Ukraine has attempted to do. Given the significant risks associated with such an approach to ratification, the study concludes that Ukraine should promptly abandon the application of Article 124, as it could potentially obstruct the investigation of war crimes committed across the entire territory of Ukraine, regardless of the perpetrators’ nationality.The second part of the study explores the issue of implementing the provisions of the Rome Statute into national legislation. Despite the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine having adopted several legislative acts, the issue of implementation remains unresolved, leading to inconsistencies between domestic law and the Rome Statute. The article presents three possible approaches to addressing this issue: (1) further amendments to the current Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine; (2) adoption of a special law on international crimes; and (3) adoption of a draft of the new Criminal Code of Ukraine, developed by the Working Group on Criminal Law Development. After analyzing all three options, the study concludes that multiple legislative approaches can be pursued simultaneously, without excluding one another. Given the ongoing active hostilities in Ukraine, which affect the practical implementation of legislation, the approach of continuing to amend the current legislation is supported, with a more comprehensive revision and final resolution to follow after the end of active hostilities.
M.D. Komarovskyi (Sun,) studied this question.