Kapustin: creditors of Ukraine will be able to collect debts through arbitration
External creditors, the requirement concerning the payment of the debt of Ukraine will meet failure, will be able to convene the arbitration courts to resolve disputes, says Director and member of Executive Committee of Russian Association of international law Anatoly Kapustin.
The Ukrainian Parliament adopted a government act that allows you to suspend payments on restructured their external debt obligations. This document will be valid until 1 July 2016. The head of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko yesterday signed the law, he will begin to act on the next day after publication in the official media.
"very may be that different lenders will have different ways. It all depends on How the parties to the agreement on the loan was being negotiated by the situation on the settlement of disputes that are able to occur in case of failure or in some other situations, " said Kapustin Last news .
according to his statement, the parties shall have the opportunity to resolve the issue through the international court of justice, If such a path has been chosen in common agreement, " Although it is extremely rare, few dispute the international court of justice considered, but it is only two or 3 cases in its history ".
"most often create special arbitration courts of arbitration by agreement of the parties. Worst of all, If this method of dispute resolution is generally Not spelled out, but there is a common phrase that "the parties shall agree on the settlement of disputes arising from this contract," - Here only a negotiated path: How to agree, so be it, " said Kapustin.
As stated by the Lawyer, convened by the parties to the arbitration are the most common way to solve such disputes." Still have a few arbitration - international monetary Fund, the international Bank for restoration and development and part other financial institutions. You can use their mechanisms, If it is agreed, " - said the head of the Department.
Arbitration Tribunal, he explained, is a special structure that will work one-time." A specially convened court of Arbitration is the mildest form, both parties on a parity basis have the opportunity to choose their judges by the existing rules, " said Kapustin.
"All decisions are binding. Another question, As it has the ability to be secured. If Ukraine does Not fulfill the decision of, say, the international court of justice, the possible mechanism of application of the security Council. If the Arbitral Tribunal or the arbitration court, it is much more complicated: the decision will be transmitted to the governments, and they themselves determine the way how the solution will run. If you are unable to fulfill, it is Not excluded the treatment of one of countries in the international court of justice with the request to provide the implementation of this decision. Although, As a rule, the performance voluntarily, bounce quite a bit, because after all it is causing serious harm to the prestige of the country, " said Kapustin.
according to him, the prospects of requests of creditors in different instances, Though to this form they have the opportunity and Not resort." Each will be due to their policy regarding the present government, to show yourself, you stay in position or determines that it is necessary to fulfill the undertaken obligations before ", - said the expert.
"If it's way joint support - to help Ukraine to defend itself default, only some countries will go to the courts. It is not excluded Even the negotiation process, If Ukraine will agree, despite the fact that the Cabinet has adequate range of options will provide for the freezing of payments. It's either dialogue or recourse to the courts, or acquiescence to the moment when Ukraine is more or less the situation in the economy settles, " said Kapustin.
The lawyer said that since the story is about interstate debt, recourse to private or national court, the Tribunal considering the particular dispute is unlikely." here, the use of such tools is simply impossible because of the sovereignty of countries. If the state agrees, it is Possible, but generally unlikely, " he said.
"One thing is clear: one way or another way would be peaceful, and Not the use of force, As it was before the Second world war - there were cases when used with weapons of power: the blockade of the ports and so on. Now, of course, only peaceful means, " said Kapustin.
|
