Every person on Earth has the right to life.

The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that the threat or use of weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons, is incompatible with the right to life and may amount to a crime under international law (General Comment No. 36 (2018) to Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, para. 66).

Today this principle is being challenged.

The Russian leadership has repeatedly made explicit nuclear threats while conducting a war of aggression against a sovereign state. At the same time, the person responsible for these actions remains effectively beyond the reach of justice because any attempt to stop him by military means risks triggering a nuclear catastrophe.

Humanity now faces an unprecedented legal deadlock.

Military escalation is unacceptable because of the nuclear threat.

Doing nothing allows nuclear blackmail to become an effective shield against international justice.

Neither option protects humanity.

International law must not allow nuclear weapons to become immunity from justice.

A peaceful legal solution already exists.

It requires no military intervention, no new international treaty, and no change to the UN Charter.

The UN General Assembly can act under the "Uniting for Peace" procedure (Resolution 377 A) when the Security Council cannot act because of a lack of unanimity among its permanent members.

We call on UN Member States to adopt a resolution that would:

1. Recognize the Putin regime as constituting a threat to international peace and security and as bearing responsibility for serious violations of international law.

2. Call upon all officials, military personnel and public servants not to execute manifestly unlawful orders of the regime, while encouraging Member States to provide protection from prosecution and political asylum for those who refuse.

3. Establish a consolidated commitment by participating Member States to guarantee protection from prosecution, within their respective jurisdictions, and recognize as acting in defence of humanity those who lawfully assist in arresting and surrendering to international justice individuals wanted for serious international crimes.

An Existing Legal Principle Applied to an Unprecedented Situation

The proposed mechanism uses a UN General Assembly resolution to record a consolidated commitment by sovereign states, based on powers they already possess under their own laws. It builds on an existing state practice: governments can make advance public offers to persons who provide information or assistance leading to the arrest or transfer of wanted individuals. The U.S. Department of State’s Rewards for Justice program is one established example.

The principle is straightforward:

advance public offer → specified assistance → fulfillment of the stated conditions → predefined benefit.

The proposed resolution applies this existing principle to an unprecedented situation. The persons capable of facilitating the transfer of Putin and other wanted individuals to justice may be inside the Russian state apparatus. For them, the decisive incentive may not be a financial reward, but advance guarantees of protection and amnesty from participating states.

The UN General Assembly does not grant these guarantees. Each sovereign state has the authority to determine the guarantees it provides within its own jurisdiction. By voting for the resolution, participating states would publicly record their commitments under common conditions.

The resolution would therefore serve as a single international instrument expressing their consolidated position and communicating the same advance offer to persons who may be able to act.

This is the proposed precedent: not the creation of a new supranational power, but the consolidation of existing sovereign powers of states into a common, publicly declared peace-making mechanism.

Why this matters

Such a resolution changes the incentives inside the regime.

It removes the expectation that unlawful orders will continue to be carried out.

It creates a protected legal path for officials to refuse criminal orders.

It creates a peaceful legal pathway for executing the arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court on 17 March 2023, without military escalation.

Most importantly, it establishes that nuclear weapons cannot serve as immunity from international justice.

This principle is broader than any single court or individual case: nuclear weapons must never provide immunity from lawful international or national justice, regardless of nationality or political alliances.

Why now

Nuclear threats are becoming increasingly normalized in international political discourse.

The longer the international community waits, the greater the risk that deterrence will fail and legal options will narrow.

Peaceful legal action must come before a nuclear crisis—not after one.

A majority already exists.

One hundred twenty-five States Parties to the Rome Statute are obliged to cooperate with the International Criminal Court, including in the execution of its arrest warrants.

On 2 March 2022, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution ES-11/1 condemning the aggression by 141 votes, showing that an overwhelming international majority can act even when the Security Council is blocked.

The same international community can now close the legal gap that nuclear blackmail has created.

Sign this petition

Your signature is a call to defend the right to life through international law—not through war.

Every signature strengthens the principle that nuclear blackmail must never shield injustice.