Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The article is devoted to the consideration of scientific approaches to compensation for environmental damage caused by the military aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine. A review of the existing and search for new legal instruments was carried out, including the international legal nature of compensation for damages caused to the environment as a result of the armed conflict according to the relevant procedures in future court proceedings. Emphasis is placed on the fact that legal instruments in the researched area are complex legal institutions and have different legal nature and administrative character, organizational features and forms of actual implementation. The current legislation on the subject of compensation for environmental damage caused by the military actions of the aggressor country on the territory of Ukraine was analyzed, according to the relevant directions, such as: damage caused to the nature reserve fund; loss of subsoil and forest resources; damage to land, water resources and atmospheric air. It was established that one of the legal instruments for the compensation of environmental damages in the context of their use can be international agreements, in particular the environmental agreement for Ukraine; the international register of losses, including its digital platform with all data on statements and evidence contained in it and to be taken into account when establishing the fact and amount of losses; lawsuits by citizens of Ukraine and collective ones, including public organizations; funds for the payment of compensation for the losses incurred, which will be filled at the expense of the frozen assets of Russia or in another way; international ad hoc commissions are flexible instruments created to deal with mass claims arising from international crises. A conclusion and proposals were made regarding the importance of legal instruments that affect the process of providing compensation for war losses to Ukraine, and are important for the improvement and further development of the legislation, which are relevant today.
S. M. Taranenko (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: