| Abstract [eng] |
This master’s thesis explores the legal possibility of confiscating the assets of an aggressor state as a form of implementing international responsibility. The aim of the research is to examine the conditions and legal instruments under which such confiscation may be carried out lawfully in response to violations of international law, particularly acts of aggression. To achieve this, the thesis analyzes the concept of state responsibility, the limits of sovereign immunity, case studies involving Iraq, Libya, and Russia, and current international legal frameworks. The study discusses fundamental principles of international law, including the prohibition of the use of force, the doctrine of state responsibility, and the maintenance of international peace and security. Case analysis reveals significant differences between asset freezing and confiscation. The Iraqi case demonstrated the only existing example of coordinated, law-based confiscation through the UN Compensation Commission. The Libyan example highlighted legal uncertainty and political fragmentation, while the Russian case revealed the paralysis of the UN Security Council due to the veto power, leading to a growing interest in alternative legal and institutional solutions. Thesis also evaluates Lithuania’s legal system and its compatibility with implementing such measures at the national level. It concludes that a coherent legal interpretation and development of collective responsibility mechanisms are essential to establishing a legally sound, proportionate, and enforceable model of asset confiscation in response to serious violations of international law. |
