International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression (ICPA)
Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has been a raison d’etre of the negotiations between Ukraine and the international community as to the possible options for prosecuting the crime of aggression. While no final solution had been made at that time, on 3 July 2023, a first step towards it was taken when the ICPA was opened in The Hague.[542] The Centre brings together prosecutors from different countries, not only from the JIT participating states. In particular, the U.S. government has appointed a special prosecutor for the crime of aggression to assist the Centre. The Centre operates with the support of Eurojust, which also administers the evidence database that is filled and analysed as part of its work.[543] It is not yet clear by which accountability mechanism the Centre’s evidence will be used, but the Ukrainian side believes that its activities will reinforce the future mechanism(s) for prosecuting the crime of aggression.[544]
In March 2025, the news broke that the United States had withdrawn its representatives from the Centre.[545] It remains difficult to assess how this affected its work.
Against the backdrop of active discussions and the development of documents related to the establishment of a special tribunal for the crime of aggression against Ukraine,[546] the Centre continued its work, developing its own approach to identifying potential subjects for future criminal prosecution. At the same time, the Centre itself is not involved in the preparatory work for establishing the tribunal.
Currently, the progress of the work of ICPA is stalled because of the lack of legal basis for collecting evidence of the crime of aggression: it is unclear which definition of the crime of aggression to be used when documenting evidence for future prosecutions. On the one hand there is article 437 of CCU and broad definition of a “perpetrator” proposed by the Supreme Court's most recent decision (see section Overview of Ukraine’s Domestic Legislation) on the other hand there is a Rome Statute and the UN resolution 3314 which gives a polar opposite definition (highest level of political and military leadership with decision-making powers). This challenge will be solved once there is a consensus reached on the kind of accountability mechanism which will be mandated to prosecute the crime of aggression in the case of Ukraine.
Although significant progress was made in 2025 towards the establishment of the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine,[547] its Statute does not provide for the integration of the Center into the structure of the future Tribunal. It is noted that evidence collected in the course of the Center's work may be considered by the Prosecutor of the Tribunal in accordance with the established procedure.[548] The Center's work is therefore continuing, and at the national level it is anticipated that the team of Ukrainian prosecutors will be expanded and that a specialised section will be established within the Main Investigations Department of the Security Service of Ukraine for the collection and analysis of information in the context of investigations under Article 437 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.
