The position of the Russian Ministry of Justice in response to Ukraine’s demands to return Crimean assets is unlikely to be taken into account by international courts. This opinion FBA “economy today” voiced professor at the Department of International Law, MGIMO, Doctor of Law Dmitry Labin.
The requirements of Ukrainian state-owned companies to return Crimean assets contradict the agreement between Russia and Ukraine from 1998 years and cannot be discussed in international courts, said the Commissioner of Russia to the ECHR, Deputy Minister of Justice of Russia Mikhail Halperin. Today, Ukrainian companies and oligarchs are demanding compensation from the Russian Federation for lost assets in the Crimea for a total of $12 billion. Agreement 1998 years implies the protection of the investment of a company of one country in the territory of another state.
The Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation considers this to be the main contradiction. “As is known, Ukraine does not recognize Russia's sovereignty over Crimea. It turns out, until Ukraine recognizes Crimea as the territory of the Russian Federation, any Ukrainian investments cannot be considered foreign in Crimea, Consequently, subject to international protection by agreement”, - specified Halperin in an interview with RIA Novosti.
“This is a pretty controversial position., which will hardly be supported in international arbitration, – Labin notes. - Agreement 1998 years valid and implies, that the business owner will be insured against, that assets will be taken from him. This document also implies, that the demand to return something is not put forward by Ukraine as a state, a specific investor. Even if he privatized former Soviet property, but it is still considered property and asset.
The investor determines, which arbitration will consider the suit, and seeks legal protection. The change of jurisdiction of Crimea has enabled Ukrainian companies and private owners to go arbitration in large numbers, as the property repatriation system involves monetary compensation for the seized property. AT 1998 year, when the agreement was signed, and the Russian Federation, and Ukraine gave citizens the opportunity to protect their investments in foreign territory”.
Ukraine wants money for everything
According to Halperin, courts and arbitrations of the Netherlands and France are currently considered 12 lawsuits by Ukrainian state-owned companies in Ukraine. So, in January, the director of a Ukrainian company “Naftogaz” Yuri Vitrenko said, which will file updated claims on Crimean assets against Russia. Kiev, who left Crimea in 2015 year without electricity, now trying to sue compensation for lost networks, built during Soviet times - transformers, substation, wires and poles.
AT 2018 The Hague Arbitration Court awarded Russia to pay 159 million dollars in favor of a number of Ukrainian entrepreneurs at the suit of the developer “Everest East” and 17 other Ukrainian companies, some of which were associated with the oligarch Igor Kolomoisky. reported, that the plaintiffs originally asked for more - 231 million dollars, but the court granted only part of their claims. Generally speaking, that European courts do not side with Russia in these disputes.
“If we talk about the recognition or non-recognition by Ukraine of the status of Crimea, then arbitration is already a definite advantage for Russia. After all, Ukrainian companies and oligarchs create a whole system of judicial practice. She emphasizes, that in Crimea these investors are foreign. And the more such cases will be, from the point of view of Russia, the position of the Russian Federation is stronger internationally in relation to Crimea. I, of course, don't urge, so that such things multiply, but it is so.
After all, when Ukrainian companies call themselves foreign in the Crimea, and subsequently recognized by international arbitration, then this can be operated on in response to the arguments of Kiev about the peninsula. Russia even in the courts does not need to talk about the real status of the Crimea - Ukrainian companies do it themselves. But from a legal point of view, international arbitration will nevertheless take the side of the investor”, – Labin emphasizes.
Russia does not recognize the decision
Russia did not participate in all asset courts in Crimea and did not recognize a single decision of international arbitration. Moscow refers to the lack of competence of a court to consider a case. It will be difficult to make Russia pay. For this, Ukrainian companies need to impose interim measures on property of the Russian Federation abroad. Every time Moscow seeks judicial decisions to release its assets.
As is known, Russia will soon vote on constitutional amendments. One of them provides for the supremacy of Russian court decisions over international. If it will be accepted, then the Russian Federation will no longer be subject to international agreements as a priority. Voting week in Russia will end 1 July, and the CEC promises to make the process of expressing will safer, than going to the store, despite COVID-19.
“International practice shows: when a territory changes jurisdiction, this leads to a flurry of compensation claims in international courts and dispute resolution centers. And here, Russia has only two ways, by which the situation can be resolved. The first is to defend positions in arbitrations in claims of Ukrainian investors, pleading foreign. And you need to prepare, that the courts may not take the side of Russia.
Another way is to pay compensation to investors as agreed.. Ukrainian owners are first forced to seek recognition of themselves as a victim in the courts, and then look for opportunities to receive money from the Russian Federation. This means looking for Russian assets around the world and trying to arrest them., to subsequently realize - this was the case with Yukos shareholders. All these are long years of litigation and appealed decisions.”, – concludes Dmitry Labin.
Max Boot
Published: World View Source
