PANEL DISCUSSION

International Humanitarian Law: Current Challenges in a Globalised World

October, 3

 


Conditions of application of international humanitarian law and implementation of humanitarian activities have undergone significant changes in recent years. Today’s conflicts last a long time, are mediated by the participation of non-state armed groups and characterized by the use of new types of weapons and technologies, complicated access to people in need of help, as well as an increase in the number of volunteer institutions and individuals seeking to provide assistance in armed conflicts.

The proliferation of armed conflicts raises questions about their legal qualification, status of belligerents and, accordingly, the proper legal regime. The consequences of modern armed conflicts go far beyond theatres of war, causing migration crises and widespread violations of the rights of civilians. Among global and regional challenges facing the international community today is a blatant disregard for humanitarian values and human rights, the increase in numbers of non-state actors in armed conflict, transnational terrorism and cyber attacks.

The existing set of legal rules of international humanitarian law is not perfect, but the main global challenge today is the lack of respect for these norms and the imperfection of mechanisms for their provision. In this regard, the central task of the Panel discussion “International Humanitarian Law: Global and Regional Challenges” is the formation of a model of continuous interaction between the academic community, NGOs and government institutions on the most pressing issues of legal regulation of armed conflicts in the context of modern challenges, identification of priority areas of work in the field of modernization of scientific research and educational activities, dissemination of knowledge and strengthening respect for international humanitarian law

Moderators

Sergiy Petukhov, Deputy Minister of Justice of Ukraine on European Integration, Head of the Interdepartmental Commission on Implementation of IHL in Ukraine 2015-2017
Olena Zerkal – Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine for the European Integration, the Agent of Ukraine before the International Court of Justice
Oksana Senatorova – PhD, Associate Professor at the International Law Department, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University

Key speakers

 

Prof. Marco Sassòli – professor of international law at the University of Geneva Switzerland and associate professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada. Prof. Sassòli has worked from 1985-1997 for the ICRC at the headquarters, inter alia as deputy head of its legal division, and in the field, inter alia as head of the ICRC delegations in Jordan and Syria and as protection coordinator for the former Yugoslavia. He has also served as executive secretary of the ICJ, as registrar at the Swiss Supreme Court.

Dr. Dieter Fleck is Honorary President of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War; Member of the Advisory Board of the Amsterdam Center for International Law (ACIL) and Rapporteur of the Committee on Nuclear Weapons, Non-Proliferation and Contemporary International Law of the International Law Association. Dr. Fleck has served as legal advisor in the Federal Ministry of Defence (1972-1974, and 1981-2004), where he was last Director International Agreements & Policy.
Dr. Vincent-Joël Proulx – Assistant Professor at the National University of Singapore’s Faculty of Law. He served as Special Assistant to the President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague; as Legal Officer to the Vice-President of the ICJ. He worked at both the Court of Appeal for Ontario and the ICJ. Dr. Proulx was appointed Secrétaire-rédacteur at the last four sessions of the Institut de Droit International and Director of Studies for the 2022 winter session of The Hague Academy of International Law.
Nicolas Fleury is the Deputy Head of the ICRC’s Delegation in Ukraine. He has worked in the international and governmental sectors for over 20 years. He has worked with the ICRC since 2001 in several contexts including Uzbekistan, Nagorny Karabagh, Russian Federation and Somalia.

Dr. Bruno Husquinet – independent humanitarian affairs specialist, the Deputy Head of the ICRC delegation in Moscow 2014-2015. He has been working in conflict zones since 2003, headed the offices of the ICRC in Libya, Iraq, Pakistan during the period of escalation of armed conflicts. Now is working in conflict zones again.  Leveraging on his professional experience and his background in Slavic Studies, he provides strategic support to profit and non-profit institutions.

Dr. Prof. Justinas Žilinskas – professor at the Department of International and EU Law at Mykolas Romeris University (Vilnius, Lithuania), an acting expert for the Lithuanian Academy of Science (from 2011). Since 2011, he is a member of the Lithuanian National Group of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (Hague) and the member of International Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission (IHFFC) (from 2012)
Ms. Nishat Nishat – the Legal Adviser to the ICRC’s Operations in Ukraine. She holds LLM in international humantiarian law at Geneva Academy of Humanitarian Law and Human Rights. She joined the ICRC in 2010 and has worked as a legal adviser and a protection delegate in Afghanistan, Philippines, South Sudan and at the ICRC Headquarters in Geneva. 

Dr. Cindy Wittke is the leader of the research group “Frozen and Unfrozen Conflicts” at the Leibniz-Institute for East and Southeast European Studies in Regensburg. Additionally, she is an external programme associate of the Peace Agreement Access Tool (PA-X) Database of the Political Settlement Research Programme, University of Edinburgh. From 2014-2017 she was a senior researcher and lecturer with the Department of Politics and Public Administration of the University of Konstanz.

Dr. Andrey L. Kozik – Secretary-General of International Law and Arbitration Association (Belarus, BILA), Member of the Board of Directors of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War (Brussels), Member of the Panel of ICSID Conciliators (Washington, DC),  Member of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 Group (Tallinn).
Dr. Prof. Olga Butkevych – Doctor of International Law, Professor of the Chair of International Law, Institute of International Relations, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv.

Programme of the Track

Tuesday 3 October 2017

9.00 – 10.00

Registration of participants of the Forum

Lobby of the NLU Students’ Palace

 

10.00 – 11.30

OPENING CEREMONY

Greeting by NLU Rector Vasyl Tatsii and officials

NLU Students’ Palace

11.30 – 13.00

FIRST PANEL DISCUSSION. KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: CURRENT CHALLENGES IN GLOBALIZED WORLD

ModeratorSergiy PETUKHOV, Deputy Minister of Justice of Ukraine on European Integration, Head of the Interdepartmental Commission on Implementation of IHL in Ukraine 2015-2017

 

Substantive Challenges to International Humanitarian Law in Contemporary Armed Confabstlicts

Marco SASSÒLI, professor of international law at the University of Geneva Switzerland and associate professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada

Show abstract

The main challenge is not that the substance of IHL is not adapted to the realities of contemporary armed conflicts, but that it is not sufficiently respected. The speaker will nevertheless identify some substantive challenges, such as the classification of armed conflicts (in particular the separation between international and non-international armed conflicts and controversies about when a situation constitutes an armed conflict – and therefore IHL applies), the geographical scope of application of IHL, the realism of IHL for armed groups (both when they are under overall control of a foreign State and are therefore supposed to apply the law of international armed conflicts and when they are genuine rebels fighting government forces or another armed group), the distinction between civilians and combatants, the admissibility of targeting and detaining enemy fighters in non-international armed conflicts (and the related procedural guarantees), the admissibility and conditions for humanitarian assistance, autonomous weapon systems, and cyberwarfare. The speaker will nevertheless conclude that chances are practically non-existent that those challenges could presently be met by new treaty law and that the main problems war victims suffer from in contemporary armed conflicts are not a result of those controversies, but of non-respect of the uncontroversial fundamental principles.

 

State Responsibility to Ensure Compliance with International Humanitarian Law and the Role of Civil Societies

Dieter FLECK, Honorary President of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War; Member of the Advisory Board of the Amsterdam Center for International Law (ACIL)

Show abstract

New wars, the role of non-State actors, and covered action weakening State sovereignty call for greater awareness of obligations under international humanitarian law. Well-defined general rules confirming the responsibility of States for the conduct of their organs underline the requirement for reparation, a measure that is essentially cooperative in nature.

Activities to ensure compliance are not only a matter of criminal prosecution of individual perpetrators, but foremost a task for governments to take preventive and responsive action as part of good governance, challenging political as well as military leadership and individuals. Diplomatic measures taken by third States and international organizations are particularly relevant in this context.

Civil societies have a unique role to play in this regard. It is the personal conviction and responsibility of the individual that leads to observing and supporting pertinent principles and rules of international humanitarian law. States transforming international law into domestic law are doing so with effective authority also in non-international armed conflicts, thus binding State organs and opposition fighters alike. Voluntary elements, set by individuals and groups of fighters, remain essential to ensure compliance in practice.

 

NLU Students’ Palace

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 20 min., addresses – 35 min. each.

 

13.00 – 14.30

Lunch

LLC

14.30 – 15.30

FIRST PANEL DISCUSSION (cont.) SPECIAL THEME

COUNTERING TRANSNATIONAL TERRORISM AND CURRENT INTERNATIONAL LAW DILEMMAS

Moderator: Olena ZERKAL, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine for the European Integration

 

The Role of International Law in Combating Transnational Terrorism

Special Reporter: Vincent-Joël PROULX, Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore

Show abstract

I will explore the role of international legal norms in combating transnational terrorism. My ambition will be to shed light on States’ obligations to combat terrorism by canvassing key developments regarding such duties since 9/11. In this regard, I will emphasise ground-breaking United Nations Security Council resolutions imposing wide-ranging counterterrorism duties on States – and arguably, individuals as well – thereby shedding light on that organ’s ‘quasi-legislative’ exercise of its powers. My survey of relevant international legal norms will also engage with other important normative schemes in the global struggle against terrorism, including international humanitarian law, international criminal law, human rights, and the remedial toolkit offered by the law of State responsibility. Building on this foundation and with some reference to anti-terrorism sectoral conventions, I will address how counterterrorism obligations are implemented and ultimately enforced in both domestic and transnational settings. In this regard, I will emphasise that international counterterrorism obligations remain painstakingly dependent on States’ national security priorities, policy infrastructure, and criminal law for effective implementation. Ultimately, the success of the global campaign against terrorism will depend on the extent to which States mirror their international obligations domestically, while also respecting other competing duties like those stemming from international human rights.

 

Conference hall (LLC, 10 floor)

Administrative notes: Introduction – 15 min., Speech – 35 min., Q&A / discussion – 10 min.

 

15.30 – 16.00

Coffee break

LLC

 

16.00 – 18.30

FIRST PANEL DISCUSSION (cont.). SECTION 2

INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: REGIONAL CHALLENGES AND UKRAINIAN CONTEXT

Moderator: Oksana SENATOROVA, Associate Professor at Department of International law, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University

  

Legal and Political Dimensions of the Minsk Agreements: Only Scraps of Paper?

Cindy WITTKE, Leader of the Research Group Frozen and Unfrozen Conflicts, Leibniz Institute for East and Southeast European Studies

Show abstract

My contribution analyses the legal and political dimensions of the Minsk Agreements. The peace and political settlement processes based on the Minsk Agreements are considered as fragile, flawed, and prone to failure. However, the Minsk Agreements continue to serve as formal and substantive politico-legal frameworks of reference for their parties and the international community when addressing the status of war and peace in Donbass. In short, the Minsk Agreements seem to be the worst and best set of formalised arrangements that the parties could agree upon supported by international mediation. How to negotiate and implement ceasefire agreements to settle conflicts that have both intra-state as well as inter-state dimensions is debated by practitioners and scholars of international law and politics alike. These general debates are shaped by questions concerning the legal and political dimensions of these agreements including the mandate and status of the negotiating parties and the nature of obligations they create. To whom are the parties of these negotiations and agreements responsible? Which international legal rules, political standards, and actors frame the negotiation and implementation of these agreements? Who has the authority to interpret and settle disputes concerning the interpretation and implementation of ceasefire agreements? Addressing these questions from both legal and political perspectives paves the way for discussions of whether and how ceasefire agreements like the Minsk Agreements become formalised political (un)settlements for disputed territories.

 

Think Globally, Act Locally: the Complex Relation of Armed Actors and State Agendas

Bruno HUSQUINET, independent humanitarian affairs specialist, ICRC deputy head of delegation in Moscow 2014-2015

Show abstract

State agendas follow the path of least resistance and opportunistic gains. These gains can be benefits to the protagonist state or, equally, prevention of benefits in antagonist states.  The latter has grown in popularity of late, where one state will seek to undermine another’s sovereignty by fuelling opposition movements at regional level. In our highly interconnected world, a local cause often coalesces with other conflicts and becomes part of larger state agendas. Locally, this interconnection draws and binds fighters from around the world who fill the ranks of non-state armed groups, blurring the notions of professional combatants, borders and ideologies. The current multitude of non-state armed actors, can in turn, offer a wide range of partners to implement their patrons’ ever-changing agendas. When no longer in favour or when it suits, states make use of terrorist designations to terminate their relationships. The presentation will explore terrorism and dynamics of state sovereignty, armed actors and external powers. It will also look at the international instruments – or lack thereof – that regulate conflicts and the challenges to negotiations, settlements and peace.

 

Conflict in Cities: strengthening the protection provided by IHL

Nicolas FLEURY, the Deputy Head of the ICRC’s Delegation in Ukraine

Show abstract

Nicolas Fleury will speak about the challenges to the protection of civilians and essential infrastructure when conflict occurs in urban settings. He will discuss the impact on the use of explosive weapons in populated areas. He will also discuss how the protection under IHL granted to vital infrastructure can be strengthened through the establishment of safety zones.

  

Volontiory by the battlefield: (in)direct participation in hostilities. A case study of Ukraine

Justinas ŽILINSKAS, Professor of Institute of International and European Union Law, Mykolas Romeris University, Member of International Humanitarian FactFinding Commission

Show abstract

The concept of civilian‘s direct participation in hostilities (CDPH) is rather recent legal development despite of the fact that civilians has always in one or another way participated in hostilities. From 2003 to 2008 International Committee of the Red Cross has worked extensively on CDPH matter and produced „Interpretive guidance on the notion of direct participation in hostilities“ by Dr. Nils Melzer (ICRC, 2009) that arguably is the most authoritative source of interpretation for the time being. Starting from Euromaidan’s Revolution of Dignity, continuing into countering Russia’s aggression against Ukraine in all of its forms (seizure and occupation of Crimea, war in Donetsk and Luhantsk regions) civil society, people and organisations, known as “volontiory” made a significant impact while supporting armed forces (national army, volunteers battalions, etc.) Volontiory were (and still are) engaged in different activities, from producing machinery, supplying of sophisticated technology for military forces to gathering or analysing reconnaissance data or providing medical services. The purpose of my presentation is to look at those different ways of support and to evaluate it from the point of view of DCPH doctrine: when volontiory’s support is becoming a direct participation in hostilities and what legal consequences it might have.

 

Cyber Operations: Current Challenges

Andrey L. KOZIK, SecretaryGeneral of International Law and Arbitration Association (Belarus, BILA), Member of the Board of Directors of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War, Member of the Panel of ICSID Conciliators, Member of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 Group

Show abstract

Among many means and methods of war, cyber operations remain actual to discuss. This is true despite IHL is well codified and well developed. New dimension, that IT capacities bring to the battlefield, challenges the classical regulation. Even the very basic rules, such as a common article two of Geneva Conventions, that for many years has been considered to be a clear trigger for IHL application, is not reliable enough anymore. Further development of artificial neural networks could open pandora-box and, unfortunately, neither IHL, neither law of disarmament, can effectively resist its development or application. However, interpretation of existing IHL rules together with effective implementation remain to be a good solution.
 

Human Rights Dimension of the Jus Post Bellum

Olga BUTKEVYCH, Professor of the International Law Department, Institute of International Relations, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Show abstract

Alongside with traditional division of the complex of laws and customs of war into jus ad bellum and jus in bello contemporary international law selects the third stage of post-conflict regulation – jus post bellum, which has been actualized in XX century with peacekeeping processes. In present-day international law a new phenomenon of “hybrid war” has appeared. A hybrid character of war makes post-conflict settlement more complicated. That is actual for the post-conflict regulation in Ukraine because Russian aggression and war against Ukraine is a “hybrid war” since it combines military, terrorist, political, economic and information measures. Human rights, legal status and lives of people are the most vulnerable in the “hybrid war”, in which foreign State aggression and terrorist activities, as well as armed, political, economic and information warfare are interconnected. Each sphere has its special influence on human rights which should be restored in the course of post-conflict settlement on the grounds of security, political, financial, information and other interests of an individual, as well as with amnesty clauses. Jus post bellum is bound with international humanitarian law and its principles and standards since it includes accountability for the IHL violation during the armed conflict.

 

Conference hall (LLC, 10 floor)

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 15 min., Addresses – 15 min. each, Q&A/ discussion – 25 min., summing up – 5 min.

 

18.30

Dinner

LLC

 


Wednesday 4 October 2017

09.30 – 10.00 Registration of participants of each venue

10.00 – 11.30

 

MEETING WITH STUDENTS 

THE ICRC IN UKRAINE: HELPING PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THE CONFLICT

Speaker: Nishat NISHAT, the Legal Adviser to the ICRC’s Operations in Ukraine

Lecture hall № 1 (NLU)

Administrative notes: Opening – 10 min., address – 20 min., Q&A/ discussion – 45-60 min.

11.30 – 12.00

Coffee break

LLC

12.0013.30

OPEN LECTURE

HOW CAN THE RESPECT OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW BE IMPROVED

Lecturer: Marco SASSÒLI, professor of international law at the University of Geneva Switzerland and associate professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada

Show lecture key points

  • The crisis of the international community and of international law
  • The substance of IHL is largely adequate for contemporary armed conflicts
  • Progress has been made in terms of prevention and (at least in terms of law and of mechanisms) repression
  • Respect for IHL during armed conflicts is insufficient
    • Existing mechanisms might be sufficient, if they functioned properly
    • New mechanisms will currently not be created; Mechanisms of other branches may therefore fill the gap
    • The challenge of armed groups
  • Role of the ICRC
    • Continues to work as a humanitarian organization
    • Its priorities are access and therefore dialogue
    • The difference between the ICRC’s operational role and its advocacy for the respect of IHL, its development and the development of new enforcement mechanisms
  • The obligation of all States to ensure respect (Article 1 common to the Geneva Conventions)
  • Prevention remains the most promising avenue
    • The earlier it is made the easier it is
      • But the message must be that it is about the respect of the enemy
      • In conflict, teach about your obligations, not about your rights
    • Some obstacles:
      • The selective perception of violations
      • The widening gap between promises and perceived reality
      • The law increasingly promises protection and respect
      • The perceived reality is increasingly dominated by deliberate, widespread and systematic violations
      • Consequences of the credibility gap
      • How to reduce the credibility gap?
        • Stop deconstructing IHL if you don’t have a better proposal
        • Obtain better respect
        • Nuance promises
        • Demonstrate that IHL is often respected

 

Lecture hall № 1 (NLU)

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 10 min., Lecture – 45-60 min., Q&A/ discussion – 20 min.

13.30 – 14.30

Lunch

LLC

14:30 – 15:30

OPEN LECTURE

THE TREATY ON THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS: CHALLENGES FOR INTERNATIONAL LAW AND SECURITY

Lecturer: Dieter FLECK, Honorary President of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War; Member of the Advisory Board of the Amsterdam Center for International Law (ACIL)

Show lecture key points

The adoption of the new Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons on 7 July 2017 (with a vote of 122-1-1, in which no nuclear-weapon State participated) may be understood on the background of existing failures to implement disarmament obligations existing under the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT); the lack of universality of the NPT; and increasing concerns on the humanitarian consequences of nuclear weapons that unfolded over the past years. While it is still too early for a lasting assessment whether the new Treaty may ultimately contribute to reaching the goal of a world without nuclear weapons and whether it has the potential to gain global acceptance over time, a comprehensive evaluation of existing legal controversies, certain textual deficiencies of the new Treaty, and foreseeable effects on international security are necessary and timely. International lawyers have an important contribution to make in this regard.

 

 Lecture hall № 1 (NLU)

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 10 min., Lecture – 45-60 min., Q&A/ discussion – 20 min.

15.30 – 16.00

Coffee break

LLC

16.00 – 17.30

OPEN LECTURE

THE ROLE OF THE UN ORGANS IN IMPLEMENTING THE STATE RESPONSIBILITY IN GLOBAL SECURITY CONTEXTS

Lecturer: Vincent-Joël PROULX, Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law of the National University of Singapore

Show lecture key points

While considerable scholarly emphasis has been placed on the UN Security Council’s role as legislator, i.e. as creator of primary counterterrorism obligations, insufficient emphasis is placed on the Council’s role as implementer of those legal norms, when it is time to actually enforce legal obligations. The absence of discourse on this front leaves us with the vital query whether that body can apply State responsibility law, the mechanism invoked to engage States’ legal responsibility for failing to comply with their international obligations, and implement legal consequences flowing from its findings of illegality. I will examine the role of this mechanism, if any, in catalyzing or informing the Council’s exercise of its powers when handling counterterrorism matters. My objective will be to shed light on whether the institutionalization of this normative scheme can yield interesting policy payoffs in responding to global security threats. Moving away from self-help remedies and unilateral countermeasures, I will argue that State responsibility for failing to prevent terrorism could be implemented by the Council and other UN organs. In substantiating my claims, I will draw from relevant institutional and State practice. The picture that will emerge is one where the Council can play a role, sometimes determinant, in applying SR norms, a prospect that may be a welcome alternative to unchecked unilateralism.

 

Lecture hall № 1 (NLU)

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 10 min., Lecture – 45-60 min., Q&A/ discussion – 20 min.

18.00 – 19.30

GALA CONCERT FOR LAWYER’S DAY

Students’ Palace

19.30 Dinner

 

Thursday 5 October 2017

09.00 – 09.30

Registration of participants

Academic Council Hall № 6 (NLU main building)

09.30 – 11.30

ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION

ARMED CONFLICT IN UKRAINE AND MODERN EUROPEAN AND GLOBAL CHANGES

Moderator: Bruno HUSQUINET, independent humanitarian affairs specialist, Deputy Head of the ICRC’s Moscow Regional Delegation in 2014-2015

Academic Council Hall № 6 (NLU main building)

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 15 min., Addresses – 15 min. each, Q&A/ discussion – 15 min., summing up – 5 min.

11.30 – 12.00

Coffee break

NLU main building

 12.00 – 13.30

ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION (cont.)

ARMED CONFLICT IN UKRAINE AND MODERN EUROPEAN AND GLOBAL CHANGES

Moderator: Bruno HUSQUINET, independent humanitarian affairs specialist, Deputy Head of the ICRC’s Moscow Regional Delegation in 2014-2015

Academic Council Hall № 6 (NLU main building)

13.30 – 14.30

Lunch

LLC

14:30 – 16:00

ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION

CYBER SECURITY AND INFORMATION SECURITY: NEW CHALLENGES OF GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL CHANGES

Moderator: Andrey L. KOZIK, SecretaryGeneral of International Law and Arbitration Association (Belarus, BILA), Member of the Board of Directors of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War, Member of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 Group

Academic Council Hall № 6 (NLU main building)

Administrative notes: Opening, introduction of participants – 15 min., Addresses – 15 min. each, Q&A/ discussion – 15 min., summing up – 5 min.

16.00 – 16.30

Coffee break

NLU main building

16.30 – 18.00

ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION (cont.)

CYBER SECURITY AND INFORMATION SECURITY: NEW CHALLENGES OF GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL CHANGES

Moderator: Andrey L. KOZIK, SecretaryGeneral of International Law and Arbitration Association (Belarus, BILA), Member of the Board of Directors of the International Society for Military Law and the Law of War, Member of the Tallinn Manual 2.0 Group

Academic Council Hall № 6 (NLU main building)

18.30

Dinner

LLC

LLC – Library & Learning Center of the Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, 84А, Pushkinska str.
NALSU – National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine, 70, Pushkinska str.
NLU – Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University, Main Building, 77, Pushkinska str.