Ukraine special tribunal plans moved forward on Friday as Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Iceland joined a Council of Europe-backed initiative to help prosecute Russia’s leadership for the crime of aggression against Ukraine.
The decision was adopted at the Council of Europe’s ministerial session in Chișinău, Moldova, where 34 member states, together with the European Union, Australia and Costa Rica, expressed their intention to take part in the agreement. The move establishes a management structure for the future tribunal and marks another step in Europe’s attempt to close a legal gap left by existing international courts.
Nordic governments join a wider accountability coalition
The Nordic countries are all among the governments supporting the special tribunal for Ukraine. Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Iceland joined a list that also includes Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and Ukraine itself.
According to the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Utenriksdepartementet), Norway will join the agreement subject to consent from the Storting, the Norwegian parliament. The matter is expected to be considered in June.
Norwegian Foreign Minister (utenriksminister) Espen Barth Eide said Ukraine was not only defending its own freedom, but also basic principles of European security. Borders, he said, cannot be changed by force, and Europe must remain united in its support for Ukraine and in the effort to hold Russia and Vladimir Putin accountable.
The Nordic alignment is politically significant because all five countries have placed support for Ukraine at the centre of their security and foreign policy since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022. For Finland and Sweden, both now NATO members, the tribunal initiative also fits into a broader reassessment of European security after years of Russian aggression.
What the Ukraine special tribunal would prosecute
The proposed tribunal is designed to focus on the crime of aggression: the decision to launch and conduct an illegal war. This is different from war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide, which can concern specific acts committed during a conflict.
The International Criminal Court has already issued an arrest warrant for Putin over the unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children. But the ICC faces limits in prosecuting the crime of aggression in this case. The new body is intended to complement, not replace, existing international justice mechanisms.
That distinction matters. The tribunal would aim at the political and military leadership responsible for the invasion itself, rather than only at crimes committed on the battlefield. Ukraine has pushed for such a mechanism since the early phase of the war, arguing that accountability must include the decision-makers who ordered the attack.
Chișinău decision creates the tribunal’s management structure
Friday’s resolution does not mean that trials will begin immediately. It establishes an Enlarged Partial Agreement on the Management Committee of the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine.
That committee will oversee funding and provide the administrative and managerial support needed for the tribunal to function. In practice, it is one of the legal and institutional steps required before judges, prosecutors, procedural rules and operational structures can be fully put in place.
The Council of Europe and Ukraine had already signed the founding agreement for the tribunal in Strasbourg in June 2025. In January 2026, the Council of Europe and the European Union agreed to finance an advance team to prepare the institutional, logistical and organisational framework for the future court.
The latest decision therefore moves the project from political commitment toward implementation, while leaving national ratification procedures and funding decisions as the next tests.
Why some countries are absent from the agreement
The agreement has broad European backing, but it is not universal. Several Council of Europe member states did not join the resolution, including Bulgaria, Hungary, Malta, Slovakia, Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Serbia and Turkey.
The European Union endorsed the initiative as a union, even though not all EU member states added their own names to the resolution. Australia and Costa Rica were the only non-European countries listed among the supporters.
This mixed participation shows both the strength and the limits of the coalition. The tribunal is backed by a large group of European governments and by the EU executive, but its legitimacy and capacity will depend on how many states complete domestic procedures, contribute funding and support enforcement.
A Nordic signal on European security and international law
For the Nordic region, support for the Ukraine special tribunal is part of a wider foreign policy line: military, financial and legal backing for Ukraine, combined with defence of the rules-based European order.
The initiative also reflects a broader concern in Northern Europe. Russia’s war has challenged the principle that borders cannot be changed by force, a principle with direct relevance for countries on or near Russia’s neighbourhood, including Finland, Sweden and Norway.
The next phase will be procedural but politically important. If enough governments ratify the agreement and provide resources, the tribunal could become a central instrument in the long-term legal response to Russia’s invasion. For now, the Nordic countries have made clear that accountability for aggression remains part of their Ukraine policy, not only a question for the battlefield.
