The verdict of the Lithuanian District Cour in the criminal case on the events in Vilnius in January 1991 and international law. Accusation of “Soviet occupation”

Abstract

The publication, in the context of current international law and legal doctrine, provides a theoretical and legal analysis of the statements of the Vilnius Court on the status of Lithuania as an “occupied State” in 1940–1990, whether “the Republic of Lithuania and the Soviet Union were different States from the standpoint of international law” during the pointed period. In this regard, on the basis of the Soviet-Lithuanian bilateral agreements, reliable archival sources and foreign materials of international affairs departments, the problem of compliance or violation of the international legal norms in force at that time with the procedure for Lithuania’s entry into the USSR is considered. The article reveals the concept, content and consolidation of the term “occupation (military occupation)” in international law, as well as the features of the occupation regime in relation to the topic of the publication. The views of well-known representatives of the Western European and Baltic legal doctrines of the concept of the “Soviet occupation of the Baltic States” are considered. A theoretical analysis of the concept of “annexation” in international relations is given, the absence of its normative consolidation in international law is noted, a number of examples of annexation in European interstate practice on the eve and during the Second World War are given. Based on the analysis of the legal nature of the Helsinki Final Act of 1975, the recognition by almost the entire international community and the prevailing views in the international legal doctrine, the legality of Lithuania’s being a part of the USSR in the period 1940–1941 as a union republic is justified.