International Law in Brief

On February 28, 2022, ICC Prosecutor, Karim A.A. Khan QC, announced his decision to investigate the situation in Ukraine. Mr. Khan notes that, though Ukraine is not a party to the Rome Statute, "it has twice exercised its prerogatives to legally accept the Court's jurisdiction over alleged crimes under the Rome Statute occurring on its territory, should the Court choose to exercise it." He stated that he has reviewed his Office's preliminary conclusions on the matter and has concluded "that there is a reasonable basis to believe that both alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity have...

On February 21, 2022, President Biden signed an Executive Order (E.O.) responding to President Putin’s recognition of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DNR and LNR), located in Ukraine, as “independent” states. According to the E.O. fact sheet released by the White House, the E.O. prohibits new investment, trade, and financing by U.S. persons to form in those regions and “the importation into the United States, directly or indirectly, of any goods, services, or technology from the so-called DNR or LNR regions of Ukraine,” among other things. Along with sanctions, the E.O. also...

On February 12, 2022, the U.S. Secretary of State, the Japanese Foreign Minister, and the Republic of Korea (ROK) Minister of Foreign Affairs issued a joint statement regarding the “critical importance of strong U.S.-Japan-ROK trilateral cooperation as we seek to address the most pressing 21st Century challenges.” The statement focused on the importance of “trilateral cooperation” and emphasized the fact that the “three countries share[d] a common view of a free and open Indo-Pacific, which is inclusive, and shared respect for the rules-based international order.” In the joint statement,...

On February 8, 2022, the European Court of Human Rights in case of Q and R v. Slovenia issued a judgment in favor of two grandparents arguing that the foster permission proceedings regarding their grandchildren had been prolonged and unfair. The Court denied the government's argument that “the restrictions necessitated by the COVID-19 crisis [would] have understandably had an adverse effect on the processing of cases before the domestic courts,” holding instead that COVID-19 restrictions did not absolve the state of responsibility in regards to special diligence to urgent...