What type defence putin takes against international criminal court

 If the International Criminal Court (ICC) were to arrest Vladimir Putin, he and his legal team would likely mount a multi-layered and highly strategic defense, rooted in legal, political, and procedural arguments. Here's how Putin would likely defend himself:

---

1. Denial of ICC Jurisdiction

Putin would most certainly challenge the jurisdiction of the ICC:

Russia is not a member of the ICC (it signed the Rome Statute but never ratified it, and later withdrew its signature).

His defense may argue that the ICC has no legal authority over him or any Russian national.

He could say that the ICC’s attempt to try a non-signatory head of state is politically motivated and illegal under international law.

---

2. Claim of Sovereign Immunity

Putin would likely invoke head-of-state immunity:

He might argue that, as a current or former head of state, he is immune from prosecution under international customary law.

Though the ICC has stated that even presidents can be tried (e.g., in the case of Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir), Putin would challenge this precedent.

---

3. Political Motivation Defense

Putin's defense team would strongly claim that the charges are politically driven:

Accusations that Western powers are using the ICC to undermine Russian sovereignty.

Putin might argue that the court is not impartial and is being used as a tool of geopolitical pressure.

His lawyers would emphasize selective justice, questioning why leaders of NATO countries or the U.S. are not prosecuted for similar wars or interventions.

---

4. National Security Justification

Putin could justify his actions as necessary for Russia’s national security:

He may claim that military operations in Ukraine were defensive, not offensive.

He might argue that Russia acted in response to NATO expansion or Ukrainian aggression in Donbas.

He could say the invasion was to protect ethnic Russians or counter "Nazi elements" in Ukraine (a claim repeatedly made in Russian propaganda).

---

5. Lack of Personal Responsibility

Another major defense strategy would be to distance Putin from war crimes directly:

His lawyers might argue he did not give direct orders to commit atrocities.

They could claim unauthorized actions by lower commanders or rogue units.

They may say there is no concrete evidence that Putin had full knowledge or intent regarding specific war crimes.

---

6. Attack on Evidence Credibility

Putin’s team may try to undermine the evidence presented:

Disputing the authenticity of documents, intercepted communications, or satellite imagery.

Arguing that witnesses were coerced, biased, or unreliable.

Accusing the prosecution of withholding exculpatory evidence.

---

7. Challenge to Arrest Procedures

If Putin is arrested, his team could challenge the manner of arrest:

They might claim it was a violation of international law, especially if carried out on the territory of another country.

They may argue it was a hostile act against Russia and politically orchestrated.

---

8. Use of Russian Law and Constitution

Russia’s constitution forbids the extradition of Russian citizens, and Putin may cite domestic law:

He might argue that international prosecution violates Russian constitutional protections.

He may emphasize the sovereignty of the Russian Federation over its own citizens and legal matters.

---

9. Counter-Evidence and Alternative Narratives

Putin’s lawyers may present counter-evidence:

Arguing that alleged civilian targets were military objects or legitimate threats.

Presenting alternative video footage or expert analysis.

Bringing forward pro-Russian witnesses who deny any war crimes occurred or who claim that Ukrainian forces staged attacks.

---

10. Delay and Obstruction Tactics

Putin’s defense would likely drag the process out:

Filing multiple appeals.

Asking for more time to prepare defense.

Repeated motions to dismiss the case on procedural grounds.

Claiming the trial violates his human rights.

---

11. Political Backing from Allies

Putin would not be alone — he would seek support from countries like:

China, Iran, North Korea, and others that oppose Western influence.

These countries might refuse to recognize the ICC’s authority and publicly defend Putin’s actions.

---

12. Diplomatic Bargaining

In the background, there could be quiet negotiations:

Putin might offer political concessions or changes in foreign policy in exchange for leniency.

There might be backroom deals between major powers to avoid setting an international precedent of trying a powerful nuclear-armed leader.

---

Final Summary:

If arrested by the ICC, Putin would not passively accept punishment. He would aggressively challenge the court’s authority, impartiality, evidence, and process. His strategy would combine legal arguments, political attacks, propaganda, and international pressure. His ultimate goal would be either to delay the process indefinitely, delegitimize the ICC, or secure a negotiated settlement that avoids full punishment.