Statement 

by the Delegation of Ukraine

Sixth Committee, 81st session of the UN General Assembly

Agenda item 78: Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-sixth and seventy-seventh sessions – Cluster III

(5 November 2026)

Mr. Chair,

I will address three topics: compensation for the damage caused by internationally wrongful acts, non-legally binding international agreements, and due diligence in international law.

Compensation for the damage caused by internationally wrongful acts

Ukraine thanks the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Mārtiņš Paparinskis, for his first report, which lays a solid foundation for the Commission’s work.

We consider that the articles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts reflect customary international law, in particular articles 31 and 36. We support the Special Rapporteur’s approach of treating article 36 as the basic rule on compensation.

Establishing that an internationally wrongful act has occurred is indispensable. But accountability is not complete if those who have suffered harm are left without redress. Without effective mechanisms to assess damage and disburse compensation, the right to compensation risks remaining a dead letter. Such mechanisms should be developed case by case, ranging from quasi-judicial bodies to administrative commissions, in full compliance with international law.

Following General Assembly resolution ES-11/5, Ukraine and its partners have been building a comprehensive compensation mechanism for the damage caused by the Russian Federation’s war of aggression. The Register is the first of three steps. It records evidence and claims of damage and is expected to receive six to eight million claims in more than forty categories.

The second step is the International Claims Commission for Ukraine, under the Convention adopted within the framework of the Council of Europe on 16 December 2025. It is expected to receive six to eight million claims from individuals and legal entities. The Russian Federation is expected to bear all costs of the Commission and of compensation awards once it becomes a member. Until then, the Commission is financed by assessed and voluntary contributions, which remain recoverable from the Russian Federation.

Building on this experience, Ukraine supports the Commission’s intention to broaden the scope of the topic by giving greater consideration to individuals. We encourage the Commission to explore whether individuals enjoy a direct and enforceable right to compensation for damage caused by internationally wrongful acts, through existing adjudicative means or new, targeted mechanisms. In mass claims, delivering justice requires meaningful compensation, based on a fair and just assessment of each claim.

One principle runs through this mechanism: the responsible State bears the financial burden of compensation. We thank all partners who took part in the negotiations, and we invite the Commission to draw on this practice.

Building on this experience, Ukraine supports the Commission’s intention to address the question of to whom compensation is owed, as envisaged in the syllabus and the first report. Article 33, paragraph 2, of the articles on State responsibility left open whether rights may accrue directly to individuals. We encourage the Commission to examine this question in the light of contemporary practice, including mass claims mechanisms in which individual victims submit claims directly.

Non-legally binding international agreements

Mr. Chair,

Ukraine thanks the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Mathias Forteau, for his third report and welcomes the adoption of five draft conclusions with commentaries. As such instruments are increasingly used, guidance that helps distinguish them from treaties contributes to transparency and legal certainty.

We welcome the simplified draft conclusion 1 and support the non-prescriptive nature of the draft conclusions, which should reflect State practice while preserving the flexibility that characterizes these instruments.

On terminology, Ukraine takes note of the Commission's choice to retain the term "agreements". We welcome draft conclusion 2, which makes clear that each State remains free to use its own terminology and that the draft conclusions aim to guide on the nature and effects of such agreements rather than to prescribe their designation.

Ukraine supports the emphasis in draft conclusion 4 on the intention of the participants. An explicit indication that a text is not legally binding should in principle suffice, as it reveals the clear intention of the participants. Where there is no such indication, all relevant elements should be assessed holistically and case by case, and the absence of an express clause should not in itself determine the nature of the instrument.

We look forward to the Commission's work on the possible legal implications of non-legally binding agreements, including the role of good faith, while preserving the fundamental distinction between treaties and non-legally binding instruments.

Due diligence in international law

Mr. Chair,

Ukraine thanks the Special Rapporteur, Ms. Penelope Ridings, for her first report. Due diligence has long formed part of international law and is reflected in treaties, State practice and the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals. The recent climate-related advisory opinions provided further guidance on relevant factors, including risk, foreseeability, available knowledge and State capacities.

We support the proposal to focus first on due diligence as a standard of conduct attached to specific primary obligations, while allowing time for reflection on its possible role as a stand-alone obligation. We encourage the Commission to examine its legal basis and its relationship with the law of State responsibility.

The topic is also relevant to cyberspace, where international law applies. Having faced large-scale malicious cyber operations, Ukraine attaches particular importance to greater clarity in this area. We support draft principles as the appropriate final form for this topic.

I thank you, Mr. Chair.