To the honorable President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy

…………

Dear Sir. I, Dr. Humphrey Humberto Pachecker C., am the president and founder of NAFA LAW, UNPAM University, as well as the AICAC-HR Human Rights Court.

My question to you is the following: Why not ask the six main member nations including the Economic and Financial Committee- one of the  six Main Committees of the United Nations “UN” for a line of credit to obtain a long-term loan of six billion dollars to buy warplanes, long-range missiles and other types of heavy weapons?

When it comes to crises, such as the current war and massacres in Ukraine, the Council, guided by the UN Charter, can take various measures. One of these measures maybe a guarantee letter for six billion dollars.

Acting under Chapter VI of the Charter, the UN can ask the parties to a dispute to resolve it by peaceful means and recommend methods of adjustment or settlement conditions. This measure has proven to be of no interest to the Russian government of Vladimir Putin.

It can also recommend referral of disputes to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which is widely known as the ‘World Court’ and is the main judicial body of the United Nations, based in The Hague in the Netherlands.

In some cases, the Security Council may act under Chapter VII of the Charter and resort to the imposition of sanctions or may even authorize, as a last resort, when peaceful means of dispute resolution have been exhausted, the use of force by member states, coalitions of member states, or United Nations peacekeeping operations to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Because Ukraine is not a member state, for the purpose of restoring international peace and security, then they could make a ‘sui juris’ concession for their own rights to have international peace and security.

The voting procedure in the Security Council is guided by Article 27 of the UN Charter which states that each member of the Council has one vote.

In deciding on “procedural issues this sui juris maybe one”, nine members must vote in favor of a decision being adopted as in this case ‘sui juris’ in favor of a line of credit for Ukraine six billion dollars to be used in the purchase of arms in this war. On all other matters, the affirmative vote of nine members is required “including the concurring votes of the permanent members”.

Although we know that, a negative vote from any of the five permanent members (China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom or the United States) can prevent the adoption by the Council of any action related to substantive matters.

But in this case, requesting a line of credit is a ‘sui juris’ vote that allegedly could be out of the control of these five permanent members (China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom or the United States).

According to the 1950 General Assembly resolution 377A (V), a document known as “United for Peace”, when the Security Council cannot act due to lack of unanimity among its five permanent members with the right to veto, the Assembly it has the power to make recommendations to UN members at large on collective measures to maintain or restore international peace and security.

One of these measures can be precisely the case requesting a line of credit is a ‘sui juris’ vote to the UN Economic and Financial Committee. 

More often than not, the Security Council determines when and where peacekeeping operations should be deployed, but historically, when the Council has been unable to make a decision, the General Assembly has done so. For example, in 1956, the General Assembly established the First UN Emergency Force in the Middle East. In the same way you can establish this line of credit to maintain or restore international peace and security.

In addition, in this case ‘sui juris’ the General Assembly may meet in a special emergency session by nine members of the Security Council or by the majority of the members of the Assembly.

To date, the General Assembly has held 11 emergency special sessions (eight of which have been requested by the Security Council).

More recently, on February 27, 2022, the Security Council, taking into account that the lack of unanimity among its permanent members had prevented it from exercising its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, decided to call a session special emergency of the General Assembly in its resolution 2623 (2022).

As a result, on March 1, 2022, the General Assembly adopted a resolution deploring “the aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter”, and demanded that the Russian Federation immediately cease the use of force against Ukraine and ordered the complete and unconditional withdrawal of all its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders.

However, unlike Security Council resolutions, I resolve them The resolutions of the General Assembly are not binding, which means that countries are not obliged to implement them.

Under Article 99 of the Charter, the Secretary-General “may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which, in the opinion of the Council, may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.”

The role of the UN Secretary General as a major actor in peacebuilding has evolved through extensive practice. The range of activities carried out by the Secretary General has included good offices, mediation, facilitation, dialogue processes and even arbitration.

One of the vital functions performed by the Secretary – who so far, in the Organization’s 75-year history, has all been men – is the use of his “good offices”: actions taken in public and in private, taking advantage of his independence, impartiality and integrity, and the power of discreet diplomacy, to prevent international disputes from arising, escalating or spreading.

In practice, this means that a Secretary General can use his authority, legitimacy and the diplomatic experience of his management team to meet with heads of state and other officials and negotiate the end of disputes between the parties to the conflict.

In late March, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres invoked the use of his good offices and asked Under-Secretary-General Martin Griffiths, UN Emergency Relief Coordinator, to explore the possibility of a humanitarian ceasefire with the Federation. of Russia and Ukraine, and other countries seeking a peaceful solution to the war.

I cannot believe that the powerful UN cannot take the action that has been taken by a Hollywood actor- Sean Penn, who has called for a billionaire to come forward and buy two squadrons of F-15 or F-16 aircraft for the Ukraine in a little attempt likely to tip the balance against the Russian invaders in the five-week war.

The actor’s plea for someone to come in and spend $300 million on “12 planes with better technology than Russian MiGs or SUs” mirrored a request a couple of hours earlier from Ukraine’s air force for American-made fighters.

While the role of arms broker may be one for which Penn is obviously not suited, the powerful UN organization does have the power and all the tools and member nations necessary including the Financial Committee- one of the  six Main Committees of the United Nations “UN” to accomplish a sine qua non act of peacekeeping and international security.

At the same time, we must consider the future- long road to recovery for Ukraine. We have to plan what could be the mechanism to force Russia to pay for the material and human damage caused in Ukraine and where we can get the funds from.

Now at this  NAFA LAW 2022 symposium for the first time we are going to discuss the mechanism to force Russia to pay for the damage caused in Ukraine, material and human.

For eight [8] consecutive years, this National Association for Lawyers NAFA LAW has held an annual symposium highlighting an international call for worldwide awareness of the crimes and human rights violations committed by the communist government in Cuba mainly under the orders and control of president Fidel Castro and his staff. Crimes that have been committed by the communist state for more than six [6] decades, but the rest of the world has remained indifferent as it happens the same with Venezuela later.

In recent years we have joined these symposiums with two affiliated institutions of NAFA LAW, these are UNPAM University, and the AICAC-HR Human Rights Court, in order to equally and annually highlight an international call for worldwide awareness of crimes and human rights violations committed by the communist government in Venezuela mainly under the orders and control of president Hugo Chávez, and followed later by president Nicolás Maduro.

In this year 2022 and since February 24, unlike the cases in Cuba and Venezuela, the entire world with billions of people have been watching with a great degree of rage and anger how the Russian invasion under the orders and the control of President Vladimir V. Putin continues to kill thousands of innocent civilians on a daily basis, at the same time that they are demolishing with total destruction, the entire infrastructure of  Ukraine. Making this catastrophe worse they are forcing millions of civilians to seek refuge in other countries, not only neighboring Europeans, but also in distant places such as this American Continent.

In this case for our ninth [9th] symposium 2022 we are faced with some facts and reality not seen in the world since the second world war. And unlike Cuba and Venezuela – with Ukraine’s case we are witnessing a clear extermination attempt with clear undeniable evidence of genocide and war crimes committed by the invading Russian military apparatus.

Another gigantic difference is that this time with Ukraine- the world is watching but it is not indifferent, it is not silent in the face of impotence, in fact it is active in helping Ukraine.

We at NAFA LAW are convinced that now is the right time to take action with positive steps for the future of Ukraine citing, invoking the necessary jurisdiction for the creation of an ad hoc international court, so that the United States and allied countries can begin to develop a plan of action to ensure that Russia is responsible for compensating Ukraine for all the costs caused in the reconstruction of all destroyed infrastructure, equally compensating for all costs of medical, humanitarian and psychological services and assistance- caused by Russia’s military crimes to the entire population in Ukraine.

In order to this plan to achieve this action and obtain the reward funds, it is necessary that this ad hoc international court order the freezing of Russian economic resources, including the resources, which according to the June 30, 2021 report, Russia’s foreign currency reserves totaled the amount of 586,000 million US dollars with a quarter in gold, and another percentage in Chinese ‘people’s currency’ renminbi and the other part funds in international institutions made up of the United States, France, Germany and Japan.

This action requires the creation of Ad Hoc Courts with an emergency hearing to obtain this freeze and to prevent Russia from using it to obtain these funds.

For a long time, international tribunals have enabled states and others to settle disputes. However, it was the Nuremberg trials after World War II that ushered in ad hoc tribunals that could try people accused of major international crimes such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.