Forgive me, readers, I will have to repeat myself a little, referring to the topic of material responsibility for damage caused by the aggressive war. One of the conclusions we made earlier was that the options for decisions taken by the main subjects of the post-war political layout will depend on who declares himself the legal successor of the Russian Federation. After all, Putin has launched such a flywheel of events that it is not particularly necessary to count on the further immutability of the world. It may turn out that everyone will not be up to reparations.
If Russia is hypothetically losing the war, then the question of compensation for losses caused by the aggressor country to the injured party arises. In such a case, the national republics may be jointly liable. Did the republic send its guys to the war – yes, it sent, did these guys harm the country-victim of aggression – yes, they did. So – pay! With money, goods, materials, raw materials, return what was stolen and taken out. The state has the right to demand compensation for damage caused to the health of its officials and citizens. Not only material damage is compensated, but also moral damage, for example, loss of relatives and friends, pain and suffering, insults. In international legal practice, in the case of unlawful deprivation of liberty, the courts decided to pay the victim a fixed amount for each day of detention.
This is what is called material responsibility in international law and is expressed in the form of restitutions and reparations.
In general, restitution is primary. This is the return of illegally seized property in kind. For example, the occupiers took out the entire bus and trolleybus fleet from some Ukrainian regional center. Or all ambulances, or all specialized fire trucks. Or all modern expensive imported equipment from a specialized oncology center. Or cultural treasures from museums, art galleries and research libraries. Please return!
However, restitution may be impossible (for example, in the case of the destruction of a museum) or insufficient to fully compensate for the harm. Destroyed transformer substations, thermal power plants, combined heat and power plants, plants, factories, agricultural enterprises, schools and hospitals, residential buildings – it is impossible to return them in kind. Reparations should be applied here to ensure full compensation for the damage.
But first of all, we are interested in whether Tatars with Bashkorts, Buryats with Chechens, etc. will pay reparations?
In international law, the issue of legal continuity and succession is regulated by a number of conventions, the general principle of which is that if you inherit assets, you also accept debts with obligations. An example is the division of the property of the former USSR. Russia accepted the Soviet debts, telling the other union republics that it was also taking all Soviet assets: foreign deposits, foreign real estate, the Diamond and Gold Funds, all the money of Sberbank. All together far exceeded the size of the debts of the USSR. So the Russian Federation did not remain the loser. But, for example, Ukraine did not recognize this “fair” division of the Soviet legacy, since much of what was created over the 70 years of the existence of the Soviet Union by the joint efforts of all peoples flew past the pockets of ordinary Ukrainians and the treasury of their new state. In addition, sovereign Ukraine continued the statehood of the Ukrainian People’s Republic (1917-1921), and the USSR included another entity – the Ukrainian Soviet Social Republic, created by the Russians in Kharkiv in 1919 as a result of aggression on its territory.
Prisoners cannot bear responsibility for the debts of the penitentiary institution!
I beg your pardon, please, contact the prison administration with claims. People’s prison! Exactly the same principle applies to Latvia and Lithuania, and to Georgia and Moldova. They do not inherit the USSR, therefore, they should not pay any reparations and restitutions, in case of something.
It is likely that when a new democratic state freed from colonial oppression appears on the world map, the burden of reparations will not be extended to it. Unless it begins to claim the legacy of the metropolis that has ceased to exist. What do I mean? If, conditionally, Tatarstan acquires true sovereignty and secedes from the Russian Federation, without claiming the property of the Russian Federation outside Tatarstan (gold and foreign exchange reserves, financial assets in foreign banks, real estate abroad, etc.), then there will be no grounds to apply restitution and reparations to it.
But whether Ukraine will agree with such a decision remains a mystery today. And who has the conscience to reproach the country that has suffered such terrible sacrifices that their consequences will be felt for decades more, of exaggerated claims against the citizens of the former aggressor country? The defeated country may quite reasonably doubt that the national republics have been completely “reforged”: they have changed politically, reformed their own statehood, rejected the colonial past, realized and condemned the actions of the previous government and are ready to cooperate in accordance with international standards.
So, just in case, we all should get ready for a certain measure of collective responsibility for national battalions, for war crimes, for the production of products of the military-industrial complex (I am afraid we will still be reminded of Alabuga with a plant for the production of shaheeds). The list of such claims can be very long, and it is not known whether the courts will be favorable to the New Democratic Republics of Post-Russia. The question of their material responsibility remains open.