Luis Moreno Ocampo, the first prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, has published his expert opinion on the February 17 Opinion No. 46/2024 of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD), revealing a real conflict of interest that seriously calls into question the impartiality of this opinion.

The opinion had concluded that Ruben Vardanyan's detention by Azerbaijan was not arbitrary.

In his expert opinion, Ocampo presents substantiated evidence of a conflict of interest, emphasizing that Ukrainian lawyer Ganna Yudkivska, current Chair-Rapporteur of the WGAD, is an active partner at Equity Law Firm, which has provided legal services and representation for the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR) in Ukraine.

Luis Moreno Ocampo conducted an open-source investigation into the “impartiality” of Yudkivska.

“It is reasonable to believe that Ms. Ganna Yudkivska, a Ukrainian lawyer appointed to the WGAD in October 2022, should have abstained from all cases brought to the UN Working Group against Azerbaijan. In short, she has a conflict of interest arising from her professional work as an active partner at Equity Law Firm, which has for years provided legal services and representation for the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR). This establishes a direct financial link between her and the Azerbaijani Government, a party to Opinion 46/2024 proceedings,” Ocampo states in his expert opinion.

He argues that this situation violates the Code of Conduct and other UN regulations that require recusal when financial interests overlap with UN functions.

“Her failure to disclose this role or to abstain from related proceedings further constitutes a breach of Paragraph 5 of the WGAD Methods of Work, which stipulates recusal in cases where conflicts of interest exist.”

Ocampo pointed also to the close personal and political ties with Azerbaijan of Ganna Yudkivska’s husband, a Ukrainian politician accused of corruption.

“A possible proper remedy is for the WGAD to invalidate Opinion No. 46/2024 and request the original petitioner to submit a new petition, which would be processed by the WGAD on a de novo basis,” Ocampo states in his expert opinion.

According to him, as a matter of transparency and accountability, and given that its entire reputation is on the line, the WGAD could respond publicly to these allegations.

“Without any further request, the WGAD could provide more information on how this case was managed, who served as the case rapporteur and how they were selected, if Dr. Yudkivska ever disclosed to the Working Group members and OHCHR staff that her law firm represented the Government of Azerbaijan, and, if such disclosure was made, whether the United Nations waived this conflict of interest to enable her to participate in all cases relating to Azerbaijan,” the first prosecutor of the International Criminal Court concludes in his expert opinion.