95rially or de facto similar to a state of war. All things considered, the situation is
complex and full of uncertainties and dilemmas, none of which have been solved
three years since the beginning of the conflict. Peace is still elusive; not to men-
tion post-war initiatives.
Thus far, Ukraine’s authorities have not elaborated a comprehensive strategy of
establishing post-conflict justice. Any attempts in this field are constrained by the
ongoing (although rather ineffective) peace process: both Minsk agreements em-
phasise – along with the obvious provisions on ceasefire – the need to conduct a
“national dialogue” which would eventually lead to the transformation of Ukraine’s
political process to guarantee a degree of autonomy (and thus more rights) to the
rebellious territories. The agreements also foresee amnesty which would protect
militants, collaborators and supporters of the “people’s republics” from crimi-
nal prosecutions. Available surveys expose the existence of tensions within the
Ukrainian society in terms of expectations on how the conflict should be solved
and whether justice should be a priority – the farther from the theatre of conflict,
the more uncompromising is the position of respondents.
In these conditions, the Ukrainian authorities have seemed to undertake an
uncertain balancing act between the goals of peace and justice. Achieving peace
seems to be the priority. Some steps signal a readiness
to discuss justice, including legislation that generally
conforms with the requirements of the “people’s re-
publics”, such as possible amnesty, a commitment to
formulate an agreement on economic, social and
cultural development and the creation of a special
regime for business and investments in order to fa-
cilitate the quick reconstruction of the destroyed
infrastructure. It also considers constitutional reforms
containing “special status” for the “republics”. None of these initiatives, however,
have entered into force due to their formal or informal conditioning that a complete
and permanent ceasefire be in place. At the same time, problems related to the
discussed conflict are being addressed within the framework of regular judicial
procedures.
Between March 2014 and the end of 2016, Ukrainian courts have issued around
1,200 verdicts in cases that concern the conflict to some degree. The Ukrainian
authorities also took steps to engage the International Criminal Court regarding
an investigation of events related to the Donbas conflict by accepting jurisdiction
of the ICC over alleged war crimes on the territory of Ukraine starting from Feb-
ruary 20th 2014. These steps can be regarded as signals that “active forgetting” is
not an option.
Thus far, Ukraine
has not elaborated
a comprehensive
strategy of establishing
post-conflict justice
for Donbas.Is it too early to speak about justice in Donbas?, Gerhard Kemp and Igor Lyubashenko Opinion & Analysis