Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
PhD student in International Law, Faculty of Law, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2
Assistant Professor, Department of International Law, Faculty of Law, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
10.48300/jlr.2023.416178.2442
Abstract
The maintenance of the sovereign equality of states rests largely on the adherence to the law of state immunity and its imperative respect. This fundamental principle finds acceptance in international documents, customary international law, and international judicial practice. Recognizing its importance, some governments have found it necessary to codify rules pertaining to state immunity within their domestic legal systems, thereby establishing it as an independent law. Russia, following the adoption of the 2004 UN Convention, enacted regulations on state immunity, effective from 2016. However, the Ukraine crisis, coupled with Russia's military invasion, and the subsequent seizure of Russian assets abroad, as well as the stance of Russia and other governments regarding this crisis, has posed a new challenge in the area of state immunity. By examining Russia's approach to this principle within its own legal framework, and scrutinizing the extent of its commitment to the principle and its exceptions, we can ascertain how Russia engages with foreign governments and evaluate the likelihood of foreign governments seizing and detaining Russian assets beyond its borders. Notwithstanding the fact that certain assets belonging to Russia and its central bank have been seized, they have not yet been confiscated or forfeited due to the legal barrier of state immunity. To date, many governments have been unable to furnish the necessary legal permits and documentation to take action against these assets.
Keywords
)