Medvedev equated the arrest of the president abroad with a declaration of war
[ad_1]
The hypothetical arrest of Russian President Vladimir Putin abroad by decision of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has become tantamount to a declaration of war. About it declared Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev, answering questions from the media and users of VKontakte.
“Let’s imagine – it’s clear that this is a situation that will never be realized, yes – but nevertheless, let’s imagine that it has been realized. The current head of a nuclear state arrived on the territory of, say, Germany and was arrested. What is this? Declaration of war on the Russian Federation,” he said.
In this case, Russia will strike at the Bundestag and the chancellor’s office, Medvedev added. According to him, the decision of the ICC on an arrest warrant creates a “colossal negative potential”, given the already worst relations between the Russian Federation and the West in history.
The criminal court in The Hague issued an arrest warrant for Putin and Russian Children’s Ombudsman Maria Lvova-Belova on March 17. On March 20, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev announced that this decision would have “monstrous” consequences for international law, and added that “practical value [в этом нет] no”.
On March 17, the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov said that the decisions of the International Criminal Court have no legal force and are void. On March 20, he said that the Kremlin was calm about the decision of the ICC and do not accept it is “close to the heart”.
On March 20, the Russian Investigative Committee opened a criminal case against ICC prosecutor Karim Ahmad Khan, as well as judges Tomoko Akane, Rosario Salvatore Aitala and Sergio Gerardo Ugalde Godinez. The investigation found that the decision of the ICC judge to arrest Russian President Vladimir Putin is obviously illegal, since the prosecutors and the court have no reason to bring him to criminal liability.
[ad_2]
Source link
