With an opening gambit that potential Russian accused charged with atrocity crimes witnessed daily on the news and social media cannot get a fair trial because they’ve been already tried, judged, and convicted in the court of public opinion (as if this is not the norm for all suspects and accused before international and even national criminal tribunals), I was asked by a colleague my views. Read on.
Convictions from courts of public opinion or from the now fashionable Peoples Courts are the least of my worries when I represent any suspect or accused. Ditto were I to represent a Russian officer – presumably of high rank, since the International Criminal Court (ICC) or other international criminal tribunal will be disinclined to go after foot-soldiers – alleged to have committed crimes in the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war. Continue reading “Defending Russian suspects and accused on mass atrocity charges: challenges beyond the court of public opinion”
Most agree that Putin’s war-making was unprovoked, unjustified, and unlawful. I say most because there are some who believe that Russia had legitimate reasons for initiating what Putin has characterized as Russia’s “special military operation.” Most also agree – or seem to agree despite any legitimate findings by an independent international tribunal – that Putin is guilty beyond any doubt of the crime of aggression. And many of those who have made their findings and conclusions of Putin’s guilt, call for the establishment of a tribunal with the singular purpose to try and convict Putin, expeditiously, for aggression. Of course, they envisage that a few others would also be charged and tried as well for aggression, but Putin is the great white whale (though it should be remembered that Moby Dick was both Ahab’s obsession and the prize he could not have). 


Realistic, scary, timely.