Ruling on the “Schneerson library” is against the international law, experts say

The experts inquired by RAPSI Thursday are of the opinion that the ruling made by an American court on the “Schneerson library” contradicts the international law.

According to Evgeny Zhilin, Associated Partner of the Law Firm "YUST", “the American justice traditionally considers that the USA laws prevail over the international law provisions, this is the essence of the problem”.

The expert stated: “No American court may exert its jurisdiction towards another State without the latter’s consent, and the Russian Federation, as far as I am aware, has never acknowledged the jurisdiction of American courts, including in this case”. E.Zhilin is convinced that such court ruling is illegal from the point of view of the international law.

He believes that negative juridical consequences for Russia are only possible within the territory of the USA, where the American laws are in force and where such ruling is to be enforced, unless it is revoked by a higher instance court.

E.Zhilin noted: “In this connection, any public assets of the Russian Federation or its units, except those as enjoy special immunity (for example, the property of diplomatic missions of the Russian Federation in the USA), may be threatened”.

The expert is of the opinion that the case is “politically scandalous, and in this connection, one should not exclude the possibility of asymmetrical response by the Russian Federation, especially in the light of the latest events. Such response, in particular, might be aimed at the limitation of the rights of American religious organizations in the territory of the Russian Federation”.

The ruling is unenforceable

Oleg Kuznetsov, Managing Partner of the Law Firm “Alliance/Tessitore, Kuznetsov and Petrova”, reminded that no proceedings may be initiated against a State, unless that State gives it consent in a special or general (by signing a relevant agreement) way.

At the same time, Russia and the USA have no joint acts of recognition and execution of the rulings by each country’s courts, which, according to the expert, does not allow for the execution of the USA courts’ rulings in the Russian Federation itself, unless such execution is not provided under the courtesy law (that is, voluntarily).

He is of the opinion that the perspectives of enforcing the American court ruling are obscure at best. O.Kuznetsov points out: “In all probability, the enforceability of the ruling would be limited to the territory of the USA themselves, as other countries may refuse to execute the ruling precisely on the grounds of sovereign immunity considerations”.

The expert noted that “one should not be hasty with execution ideas: there is also the appeal stage, which Russia, I think, will resort to”. He reminded that the library issue had already been considered by the Russian courts, and no ruling of those was executed.

Vladislav Kapkanov, Deputy Chairman of the Bar Association “Thy Attorney”, believes that “it is not that Russia is obliged to execute a ruling by an American court. It is that the USA will execute their decision themselves, and we may face the situation, when recourse may be taken upon the property of the Russian Federation in the territory of the USA”.

Late July of 2011, a court in the USA ordered the initiation of the process of return of approximately 12 thousand books and 50 thousand rare documents from the collection of Yosef Yitzchok Schneerson, a Lubavitcher Rebbe, to Chabad Lubavitch Jewish religious movement. The books and documents are currently in the possession of the library fund of the Russian Federation. The court of the District of Columbia ordered Wednesday that the Russian Government pay $50 thousand per day until the collection is returned to the American Hasidim.

For more details see here.