FORMATION OF A NEW TYPE OF STATE MATERIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW: NORMATIVE FRAMEWORKS AND PRACTICE

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive theoretical and legal analysis of the transformation of the concept of state responsibility in contemporary international law, focusing on ongoing international crimes, particularly the crime of aggression. It substantiates the argument that the classical model of state responsibility in international law is inherently retrospective (post factum) and therefore insufficiently effective in addressing prolonged and systematic violations of peremptory norms of international law. In the context of an ongoing act of aggression, it is demonstrated that such a model effectively leads to a delay in compensation for damage and fails to ensure adequate protection for the injured state. Particular attention is paid to analysing the normative foundations for forming a new model of responsibility, including the roles of jus cogens norms and erga omnes obligations, as well as the concept of a continuing internationally wrongful act. The argument is made that aggression, as a violation of a peremptory norm of international law, gives rise to collective responsibility and justifies coordinated action by the international community to terminate the wrongful act and minimise its consequences. The article formulates the concept of ex ante state material responsibility, which entails the implementation of property-related consequences for the state that has committed an internationally wrongful act, prior to the cessation of said act and without awaiting a final judicial decision. The key features identified are its temporary and conditional nature, compensatory orientation, collective implementation mechanism, and functional focus on terminating the violation and mitigating harm. The study also analyses contemporary international practices relating to the freezing of the aggressor state's sovereign assets, the use of income generated from these assets for the benefit of the injured state, and the development of reparation-oriented financial mechanisms. It demonstrates that these measures do not deviate from international law, but rather reflect its evolution and adaptation to new challenges. The article concludes that a new functional model of state material responsibility is emerging which combines elements of coercion and compensation, responding to contemporary needs to maintain the international legal order.