The Russian Federation is gradually recognized as the state-existence of terrorism. It is an effective but insufficient remedy

But the right does not have time for the discovery of social scholars, so the flaps of legal norms are walking here and there: in criminal law to counteract and condemn terrorists, then in economic - to prevent the financing of terrorist activity, and then in public international law for isolation Whether they do it. And so, it turns out that it is not the only system, but individual tools.

Terrorist activity and criminal prosecution for its commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity and Russian law enforcement officers are often characterized as "terrorism" because it keeps another population in fear, and its goal is to achieve political goals. This corresponds to the disposition (the description of the composition of the crime - in Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - a terrorist act). For example, a variation as "the use of weapons . . .

with a danger to life or health . . . for the purpose . . . intimidation of the population. " But, according to some criminal law experts, a terrorist act in the context of Russia's war in Ukraine is too "gentle" characteristic, because the Russian Federation is serving in the territory of Ukraine serial and methodological activity, which is covered by a broader concept of "aggressive war Not for one, but by a number of articles of the Criminal Code of Ukraine: - Art.

437 (planning, preparation, solution and aggressive war)- Art. 438 (violation of the laws and customs of war) - Art. 439 (use of weapons of mass destruction) - Art. 441 (ecocide) - Art. 442 (genocide) - Art. 444 (crimes against persons and institutions with international protection) - Art. 434 (bad treatment of prisoners of war) - Art. 432 (looting) - Art. 433 (violence over the population in the area of ​​hostilities) a number of articles for collaboration, etc.

"Condemnation for terrorism creates confusion for international justice institutions, and gives the Russian side arguments to deny occupation and aggression," said Gunduz Mammadov, Deputy Prosecutor General of Ukraine in 2019-2021.

In addition, unlike a set of norms on anti-terrorist activity (development and examination of experience), international law better regulates the humanitarian aspects of war and has precedents for the settlement of both crisis situations and post-war relations with the aggressor state. On February 26, Ukraine appealed to the International Court of Justice (UN) with accusations against Russia of violating the 1948 Convention on genocide.

Is it worth considering the question closed? The fight against terrorism financing, monitoring of operations from the territory of the Russian Federation or in favor of its residents prevention of terrorism and organized crime gave birth to a phenomenon of financial monitoring, semi -secret intelligence of the origin of wealth and the purpose of money transfers (now - by over UAH 400,000).

Since the laws limit the movement of funds in great detail, it is probably the most powerful tool for the suppression of terrorism and the legalization of criminal income. Groups of people involved in these illegal relationships are forced to rely on cash and create, in fact, a parallel economy.

The International Convention on the Combating the Financing of Terrorism in 1999 is the fundamental normative act, and the executive body of the global process of preventing terrorism (and laundering from criminal activities) is a group of financial measures development (FATF).

Having a means of financial monitoring, there is a great temptation to use its capabilities against other hostile phenomena, such as trafficking in human beings, making weapons of mass impression, radical political movements - this, in particular, abuse authoritarian countries such as Russia.

In Ukraine, such a temptation is about the Russian Federation, which finances activity similar to terrorism, up to merging with it: the signs of terrorism are objectively concentrate of various aspects of aggressive war Damage ").

Moreover, Ukraine considers Russia as a violator of the International Convention on the Combating Financing of Terrorism (as well as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) and since 2017 has been a dispute in the International Court of Justice of the UN (decisions expected in early 2023), recognized as DNR terrorist organizations and LNR.

Meanwhile, FATF in his official statement acknowledged that Russia's actions against Ukraine "contradict the basic principles of FATF" is a "gross violation of obligations on international cooperation and mutual respect.

" As a result, the role and influence of the Russian Federation in FATF is significantly limited: now Russia cannot vote for any decisions, embrace governing or advisory roles, provide experts or reviewers to work out new measures, or evaluate the effectiveness of the available ones. This is not bad for the first step, but very little to prevent Russia from avoiding sanctions through financial transactions with intermediaries in third countries.

Another way to combat terrorist financing is to significantly limit financial transactions with key persons - both individuals and organizations that are organizers and executors of terrorist actions. The list approved by the EU Council includes only 13 individuals and 21 organizations (none of Russia and Belarus); The list approved by the UN Security Council - several hundred individuals, and more than 100 organizations, mainly related to the DPRK and radical Islamist movements.

A small amount is generally natural, given the secret of preparation for terrorism: it is objectively difficult to prove the guilt of a person who has avoided liable. Baltic countries have declared Russia one by one sponsor of terrorism. For example, the resolution of the Lithuanian Seimas stated that "the Russian Federation, . . . is a state that supports and carries out terrorism.

" However, neither the EU, nor Estonia, neither Latvia, nor Lithuania made changes to the list of persons and organizations involved in the financing of terrorism. Although it is impossible to make direct money transfers in favor of residents of Russia from the Baltic States, this is not related to financial monitoring. We hope that after the UN ISS decision, FATF participants will take more radical steps. This is about the international legal status.

In Ukraine, the fact of carrying out acts of terrorism by Russian legal entities (and Russia as a state) was ascribed to the laws of Ukraine "On Ensuring the Rights and Freedoms Status in certain regions of Ukraine "of February 24, 2022 (see the third part of the preamble Decree No. 63/2022 of February 23, 2022), as well as as stated …), Resolution of the CM of Ukraine of August 9, 2022 №885.

In addition to its own bodies of the Russian Federation, it also refers to the maintenance of terrorist organizations: possibly LNR, DNR or others. Therefore, it is an undeniable fact for state authorities of Ukraine, including judicial and law enforcement bodies. The exception, theoretically, is the Constitutional Court.

Despite the legislator's step, financial intelligence authorities in the executive branch of the Ukrainian authorities are not media not media Nihila in financial monitoring rules. It is difficult to define as a subjective, proactive position of SCFM and other authorized bodies of Ukraine - NCSSMC, National Bank, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Justice.

In the list of risky countries, as of today, only the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Korean People's Democratic Republic are present, as in FATF. Thus, in the past, these bodies mostly updated the lists of terrorism, based on UN decisions, and did not risk getting charges of bias. However, it is not now possible to expect this, given the place of the Russian Federation in the UN Security Council.

And in general, it is difficult to imagine more urgent circumstances for the manifestation of subjectivity and independent recognition of the Russian Federation and Belarus by legal entities (states) that carry out financing of terrorist activity - in the understanding of the Law of Ukraine "On Prevention and Counteraction terrorism and financing the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

" In addition, returning to the first section on criminal prosecution, the fact that Russia conducts terrorist activity as a state did not entail criminal proceedings under Article 258 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine; The reasons for such inaction of law enforcement and judicial bodies are unclear.

The State-Aponsor State-embargo, boycott and other trade sanctions, after all, the media has widely covered another aspect-the recognition of Russia by the state-existence of terrorism (DST), which has already been voted by the United States, Latvia, European Parliament. This recognition can have different consequences under national law.

For example, under the US law, this automatically puts into effect several predefined sanctions: - a ban on the export and sale of weapons; - control (individual licensing) of double use goods; - prohibition of economic assistance; - imposition of financial and other restrictions - individual licensing of loans, insurance, other financial services, construction.

Russia's recognition by the US Department of Terrorism is a prerogative of the US State Department, and the sanctions control controls the Office of Foreign Asset Control, which issues permits for separate operations for violation of the sanction regime. Since 2014, such permits are needed for some operations with residents of Russia-first as a result of annexation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, then aggression in eastern Ukraine, now full-scale aggression and occupation.

What will change by comparing with the regime of already imposed sanctions? Trade with Russia will change from free to permit-for any transfer of prohibited goods and technologies will need to be asked for permission. Other states may or may not join sanctions, but merchants from other countries will be aware of the US position and will avoid violations of US law.

Compensation in the civil and economic process of recognition of Russia by the state-existence of terrorism removes immunity from state Russian property and opens the way to lawsuits in the US courts.

This would be even a greater step than the C-19 law in Canada, where the assets of sub-persons, including residents of the Russian Federation, can be transferred for the benefit of the victims-because in the sanctions list of Canada there are only separate bodies of the Russian Federation, such as the Central Bank. Professor Ingrrid Brunk (Wüht), teacher of the Law School of the University.

Vanderbies, worries that the law does not provide for the rights of Ukrainian citizens, enterprises or states to recover the frozen assets of the state-sponsor of terrorism, so the removal They were affected by the actions of the state-sponsor of terrorism. However, the lawyer of Charles G.

Kemp, which is referred to for Forbes, notes the precedent-the decision of the US Supreme Court in the case of OPATA against the Republic of Sudan, where the court not only supported the billions of US $ billions at the expense of Sudan's assets, which then had the status , but also extended the deadline for claims. It was about explosions arranged by Al-Qaeda fighters near the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, from which more than 200 people were killed and thousands were injured.

Important, "participants of the trial will be able to receive not only compensation, but also penalties of Russia. . . .

such court decisions that can be made against Russia will be almost endless in number and will damage the ability of the Russian Federation to carry out financial transactions outside Russia for the following decades, Increasing her more financial suffering than any sanctions that are imposed or sanctions that will be imposed on Russia if it is recognized as a state-sponsor which satisfy the definition of the state-sponsor of terrorism.

From an economic point of view, access to frozen assets of the Russian Federation is better given earlier than later. In the hot phase of the war, the benefit of every dollar is more significant to support Ukraine and restore US reserves as a strategic partner of the aggressor victim than when the situation is stabilized.