The Kremlin’s press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, indicated that Moscow has not yet set its stance in coordination with Yerevan regarding Armenia’s Constitutional Court recognition of obligations under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). He spoke during a television program and emphasized that the issue would be discussed with Russia’s partners before any formal position is announced.
In a statement to the program, Peskov said,
“Not yet. We will discuss this with our partners”, underscoring that final alignment would come after consultations with allied countries and relevant legal authorities. This remark highlighted the cautious approach Russia is taking as it monitors regional reactions and the evolving legal commitments Armenia has undertaken under international law.
Earlier, on March 24, Armenia’s Constitutional Court declared that the country’s obligations under the Rome Statute are constitutionally binding. The ruling becomes effective upon its publication, and it will depend on Armenian Parliament approval for full implementation of the Rome Statute within the national framework. Armenia’s representative on international legal affairs, Yeghishe Kirakosyan, had previously announced Armenia’s accession to the Rome Statute in connection with the ICC pressuring Azerbaijan to unblock the Lachin corridor, a key lifeline corridor for movement in the disputed region. This political and legal development places Armenia at a critical intersection of domestic constitutional processes and international criminal law obligations, inviting careful consideration by regional partners and international observers alike .
Meanwhile, on March 17, the ICC’s preliminary hearing chamber in The Hague issued arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, the Commissioner for Children’s Rights in Russia. These warrants have broad geopolitical ramifications and intersect with ongoing regional security dynamics, particularly given Russia’s role in the South Caucasus and Armenia’s security concerns. The warrants prompted official responses from Moscow and various international commentators, who cautioned against drawing premature conclusions about consequences for bilateral relations or regional diplomacy. The situation continues to unfold as legal actions and political responses intertwine, shaping how states interpret responsibility, collaboration, and enforcement of international criminal norms in a volatile neighborhood .
Observers note that Armenia’s move to constitutionalize Rome Statute obligations marks a significant step in aligning national law with international criminal justice standards. For Moscow, the decision may necessitate recalibrating diplomatic language and practical cooperation with Yerevan, balancing legal commitments with strategic considerations in a region where security guarantees, transit routes, and political influence matter deeply. Experts point out that the timing of Armenia’s parliamentary review and potential ratification will influence how Western partners and regional players perceive Armenia’s stance, as well as how Russia frames its responses in both public diplomacy and private consultations .
As the ICC case against the Russian leadership continues to unfold, the Armenian scenario illustrates the broader pattern of states navigating the tension between domestic constitutional processes and commitments under international criminal law. The path from court recognition to effective implementation often involves a blend of legislative action, administrative readiness, and sustained bilateral dialogue. Stakeholders in Moscow, Yerevan, and beyond are watching closely, recognizing that decisions taken in the weeks ahead could influence not only legal obligations but also the texture of regional partnerships, security arrangements, and the visibility of national sovereignty within the framework of international institutions .