The Russian Foreign Ministry satisfied with the first decision of the Hague Tribunal for the Kerch Strait


The Russian Foreign Ministry commented on the first decisions that were made within the framework of the Hague Tribunal, the meeting of which was initiated by the Ukrainian side. The Russian department noted that the tribunal’s operating procedure has been established and the necessary procedures have been approved.


The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation is pleased to announce that at present many Ukrainian requirements have been left virtually unattended. In particular, Kiev demanded a hearing on the status of the Kerch Strait and the incident of November 2018 of the year “as soon as possible”.

From a statement by the press service of the Russian Foreign Ministry:

The requirements of Ukraine regarding the rejection of the jurisdictional stage and the maximum reduction in the time of the proceedings were ignored. The Tribunal agreed with the arguments of Russia and provided for the possibility of dividing the process into two separate stages - the jurisdictional and the merits of the dispute.

The material says that each side receives six months to prepare memoranda. Ukraine insisted on two months. At the same time, Ukraine hoped to receive a comment from the members of the Hague tribunal in which Russia should initially be condemned. Nothing of the kind happened.

It must be recalled that the Crimeans prepared their answer to Kiev. So, in Crimea, they intend to invite representatives of the international tribunal to investigate the case of armed violation of Russian maritime borders by Ukrainian boats and a tugboat. The final meeting of this tribunal is reported to be held either in one of the West European countries or in the country of Latin America.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. BAI
    BAI 25 November 2019 16: 34 New
    • 11
    • 2
    +9
    The tribunal agreed with the arguments of Russia

    But have we not refused recognition of its jurisdiction?
    1. cniza 25 November 2019 16: 50 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      So we are trying to prove:

      The Tribunal agreed with the arguments of Russia and provided for the possibility of dividing the process into two separate stages - the jurisdictional and the merits of the dispute.
      1. Hunter 2 25 November 2019 17: 01 New
        • 7
        • 4
        +3
        I feel they are helping Russia in this tribunal! Ukrainians are noble Sutyazhniki, and the political situation must be taken into account! But ... there is no other alternative now! Need to sue!
        I just don’t quite understand why our Foreign Ministry is so satisfied?
        1. hydrox 25 November 2019 17: 21 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is satisfied that the political background of the conflict has been excluded from the consideration: in this case, the case will be discussed as part of a violation of the naval code of the previously established RULES OF SHIPPING IN THE STRAINS
        2. Chit 25 November 2019 18: 05 New
          • 5
          • 26
          -21
          How what?
          The fact that "at the moment, many Ukrainian requirements have been virtually ignored."
          But the ships quickly returned.
          Here is such a victory on all fronts. Including the diplomatic.
          1. SOF
            SOF 26 November 2019 06: 57 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: Chit
            But the ships quickly returned

            ... and the toilets .... the toilets were found ??? ....... wassat wassat wassat
            .... you will interpret any "bunch" in your own strength? .... laughing ..... whereas the launch of the railway part of the bridge, in your favor, saw through ...? wink ... or "bridge film" ...?
    2. Aleksandre 25 November 2019 17: 03 New
      • 16
      • 3
      +13
      Quote: BAI
      But have we not refused recognition of its jurisdiction?

      I understand that the Arbitration Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (yeah, nifiga is not the Hague Tribunal, by the way) cannot consider cases related to conflict situations between Navy member countries. Yes, only civil conflicts: the fishermen went to the wrong place and the ship was arrested, for example. Hence the lack of jurisdiction by this tribunal in this case.
      Therefore, I can not imagine why the hell Russia climb there. No jurisdiction? Well, ask the court to hold hands and let the cones go to the forest to collect. After all, they will be judged not by law, but by current political necessity. Some kind of masochism, "hedgehogs cried, pricked, but continued to eat the cactus."
      1. Operator 25 November 2019 17: 26 New
        • 20
        • 3
        +17
        As I understand it, the Russian Foreign Ministry, on an exceptional basis, wants the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, located in Hamburg (and not in The Hague), to sign itself if it does not have the authority to consider the border conflict with the participation of the naval forces of the parties (according to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea).

        Which is far from a fact, given the arbitral award of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (The Hague) in the Yukos case, which brazenly violated its own Charter by including the issue of the eligibility of tax claims of the Russian Federation to the specified company. Another thing is that the Dutch criminal court overturned this decision of the arbitration court, but I did not hear something about the criminal prosecution of members of the arbitration court who violated their own Charter by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation (in the form of submitting an application to Interpol).
      2. Avior 25 November 2019 17: 45 New
        • 3
        • 3
        0
        Since Ukrainian sailors are considered as defendants on charges of violating the state border, and are not considered prisoners of war, the tribunal does not consider this a military conflict between the Navy of the two countries, but a civil conflict.
        1. Aleksandre 25 November 2019 18: 20 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: Avior
          Since Ukrainian sailors are considered as defendants on charges of violating the state border, and are not considered prisoners of war, the tribunal does not consider this a military conflict between the Navy of the two countries, but a civil conflict.

          Nevertheless, it is difficult to deny that the border was violated not by a couple of fishing pit, but by any, but military vessels. Yes, and the sailors have long been released.
          1. Avior 25 November 2019 18: 35 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            warships, and let go, you're right.

            but initially, when the tribunal took the matter into consideration, it was based on this consideration.
            as far as you can understand, now they will once again consider the case for compliance with the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
      3. Lelek 25 November 2019 17: 52 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Aleksandre
        Therefore, I can not imagine why the hell Russia climb there.

        hi
        If only about our civilian vessels arrested and held by Ukraine. Regarding the military boxes of Ukraine, you are right, you had to send "to the macaque." yes
        1. Aleksandre 25 November 2019 18: 18 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Lelek
          If only about our civilian vessels arrested and held by Ukraine.

          Civilian vessels, if I am not mistaken, had Crimean ports of registry. Since the "civilized world" does not recognize de jure Crimea as Russian territory, then in all sorts of international judges there will be little sense, IMHO.
          1. Lelek 25 November 2019 18: 29 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Aleksandre
            Since the "civilized world" does not recognize de jure Crimea as Russian territory, then in all sorts of international judges there will be little sense, IMHO.

            hi
            Here is the answer to the questions of many users at VO - "why should we listen to their advice, claims and sentences?". IMHO, they should not and they would go on ....
          2. Avior 25 November 2019 18: 36 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            not all, only the seiner, as I understand it, had a Crimean registration
    3. GKS 2111 25 November 2019 17: 06 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Yes, they long ago refused to recognize his jurisdiction ...

      I don’t understand why we are still listening to what they say there ... Partners ..? Milosevic’s fate of "our" RUSSIAN ALL WISDOMERS has not taught anything yet? wink
      1. Avior 25 November 2019 17: 41 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        This is not that court.
        This is a court under the Convention on the Law of the Sea.
        Did not leave the Convention
      2. Brturin 25 November 2019 17: 43 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: GKS 2111
        Yes, they long ago refused to recognize his jurisdiction ...

        There’s a conversation about another organization ....
        Federal Law of February 26 1997 No. 30-ФЗ "On Ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Agreement on the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea" .... "The Russian Federation declares that in accordance with Article 298 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it does not accept the procedures provided for in Section 2 of Part XV of the said Convention, leading to binding decisions on disputes related to the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 Conventions, [Article 15 Delimitation of the territorial sea between states with opposing or adjacent coasts Article 74 Delimitation of the exclusive economic zone between states with opposing or adjacent coasts Article 83 delimitation of the continental shelf between states with opposing or adjacent coasts] regarding delimitation of maritime boundaries; disputes related to historical bays or legal grounds; disputes related to military activities, including military activities of state courts and aircraft, or disputes related to law enforcement activities related to the exercise of sovereign rights and jurisdiction, as well as disputes in respect of which the United Nations Security Council exercises functions in accordance with the Charter United Nations ...
        provided the possibility of dividing the process into two independent stages - the jurisdictional and the merits of the dispute

        foreseen - that's when after all his meetings he makes a decision, then ... patience ...
    4. Fraracol_2 25 November 2019 17: 07 New
      • 6
      • 10
      -4
      Try to refuse. Become a complete outcast? And then where will you go?
      1. bk316 26 November 2019 13: 13 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Try to refuse. Become a complete outcast?

        What kind of court are you talking about?
        If nobody is going to refuse about the MTMP, but what about the ECHR or the ICC so that the United States, which does not recognize their jurisdiction, is completely outcast? laughing
    5. hydrox 25 November 2019 17: 13 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      In order to answer your question, familiarization with the content of the Ukrainian lawsuit is required, and now we have no reason to discuss this case, especially if it concerns the naval confrontation of the countries participating in the conflict.
    6. Avior 25 November 2019 17: 39 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      did not refuse.
      the tribunal will decide
    7. The comment was deleted.
    8. Cut Samshitov 25 November 2019 18: 27 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: BAI
      The tribunal agreed with the arguments of Russia

      But have we not refused recognition of its jurisdiction?

      Life doesn’t teach anything. There was little WADA. You can not play with a sharpie, the result is always in favor of the latter. The United States has refused to recognize all of these "international" scarabs and it's time for us to go.
    9. GibSoN 26 November 2019 20: 46 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But have we not refused recognition of its jurisdiction?
      As soon as you start writing such a game on a PC created from scratch (development, design, production), on an OS that was also built from scratch, using a keyboard and mouse, also created from scratch. At the same time, eating, dressing and wiping it, that no matter how it does not depend on anyone, then it will be possible to return to this issue! That is, not when! Breathe, relax and realize the reality! You can’t have everything that is, without being reckoned with anyone! Even China can’t afford itself under the current conditions .. Although it has much more opportunities than all combined.
  2. Thrall 25 November 2019 16: 36 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    But was it worth Russia to bother about this scum tribunal?
    1. cniza 25 November 2019 16: 51 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      We have to, there are no others ...
  3. Victor_B 25 November 2019 16: 38 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Yes, this Hague tribunal will sue us anyway.
    Wherever I sit.
    Political order, however!
    1. cniza 25 November 2019 16: 52 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Not everything is so simple, otherwise everyone will turn away from it and create another organ.
  4. Baloo 25 November 2019 16: 39 New
    • 7
    • 7
    0
    At the same time, Ukraine hoped to receive a comment from the members of the Hague tribunal in which Russia should initially be condemned. Nothing of the kind happened.
    [B]
    Getman Zyuza already prepared arguments

    did not help
    1. Thrall 25 November 2019 16: 43 New
      • 9
      • 11
      -2
      Crime disclosed. Toilets detected smile
    2. prior 25 November 2019 16: 50 New
      • 7
      • 7
      0
      This is not an argument, it is the president’s stick untoward.
      Argument ... dropped.
    3. Lelek 25 November 2019 18: 12 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Balu
      Getman Zyuza already prepared arguments

      hi
      Indigenous trolls about the hetman election in the future:
  5. Thrifty 25 November 2019 16: 52 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    And why rejoice? The verdict of this tribunal will be clearly anti-Russian, we will be accused of everything that can only be tied to the Crimea, up to an attempt to bring the planet out of orbit.
    1. Terenin 25 November 2019 19: 30 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Thrifty
      And why rejoice? The verdict of this tribunal will be clearly anti-Russian, we will be accused of everything that can only be tied to the Crimea, up to an attempt to bring the planet out of orbit.

      hi
      And before, this is NATO’s main entertainment venue since 1991, we haven’t written gingerbread cookies winked . If these mattress covers are in a hurry, then time works for Russia. Nobody canceled maneuvers in the information war.
      As the saying goes, the dogs bark, and at this time, along with the construction of SP-2, the onshore gas transmission network is being expanded. In parallel to the existing onshore continuation of the Nord Stream (OPAL gas pipeline), German companies are constructing the Eugal gas pipeline to supply gas to the Central European gas hub near the town of Baumgarten (Austria), and NET4GAS is building the Capacity4Gas gas pipeline in the Czech Republic (parallel to the existing Gazela gas pipeline), with two-stage commissioning, in 2019 and 2021.
  6. The leader of the Redskins 25 November 2019 16: 52 New
    • 5
    • 4
    +1
    Let it be. Fair. Commentators in the style of "we do not need him," please do not get excited, many of the current "generals" and "marshals" have earned their "pluses" in angry rhetoric in the claims of the Hague tribunal over Poroshenko. So for starters, decide whether you need it or not.
  7. Bulgarian 25 November 2019 17: 32 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Our Foreign Ministry is always satisfied. How diplomatic it is. But in fact, nothing good. They dragged us again into another "fornication."
  8. Ross xnumx 25 November 2019 18: 56 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    The main plus of the analysis of the cases of Ukraine and Russia is that it is in the Hague court that the definition of the Crimean Peninsula as legal Russian territory can arise, and then it will be legally unreasonable (for the EU) not to recognize Crimea ... belay
    If we take the economic background of this and other matters, it becomes obvious that some republic leaves no hope of shaving free fat (I have already indicated where).
    The centrifugal tendency of the 90's led to a sad conclusion for some - Russia is no longer a good sponsor for those who decided that political freedoms provide some kind of economic advantage.
    Welcome! You have long been waiting in the EU with open arms, and the "Field of Miracles" has been carefully plowed ...
    laughing
  9. Rwmos 25 November 2019 21: 29 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    For the time being, in matters related to dill, we adhere to restraining tactics. We’re not attacking, which gives the morons a reason to yell that they "put all the time". However, the defensive tactics are so good that the ball is passed to another side of the field, we are alive, everything is fine with us. This is for YOU to do something, and we will catch your mistakes
  10. seacap 26 November 2019 00: 07 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    What is this all about? And that there was already an intervention and someone already captured us, now, damn it, but I did not know. Which court, are we already under someone’s control and management? And what courts or rulings does the USA and China accept? Soon they will beat us in the face and punish us with whips, and we will bow and, rubbing our snot on our cheeks, will thank us.
  11. Retvizan 8 26 November 2019 12: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    "Ukraine insisted" ...
    I hope that the time has ended when the West and all the structures under its control harnessed for Ukraine, fulfilling all its whims and whims.