The United Nations Office at Geneva
Multimedia Newsroom
HRC CoI Ukraine Press conference 16 March 2023
/
57:33
/
MP4
/
4.4 GB
TRT: 03’46”
SOURCE: UNTV CH
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH/NATS
ASPECT RATIO: 16:9
RELEASE DATE: 16 March 2023
HYBRID PRESS BRIEFING
GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
SHOTLIST
-
- Exterior wide shot: UN flag alley UN Geneva.
- Cutaway: medium lateral shot, speakers behind podium and journalists at press conference room, UN Geneva.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Erik Møse, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The commission has concluded that Russian authorities have committed numerous violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, in addition to a wide range of war crimes, including the war crime of excessive incidental death, injury or damage, willful killings, torture, inhuman treatment, unlawful confinement, rape, as well as unlawful transfer and deportation.”
- Cutaway: medium lateral shot, journalists and photographers in the press conference, UN Geneva.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Erik Møse, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The Commission has also found that the waves of attacks from the 10 October 2022 on Ukraine's energy-related infrastructure by the Russian armed forces and the use of torture by Russian authorities may amount to crimes against humanity. The Commission recommends further investigations.”
- Cutaway: medium lateral shot, speakers behind podium at press conference room, UN Geneva.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Ms. Jasminka Džumhur, Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The Commission has, in limited number of cases, found that Ukrainian armed forces (are) very likely responsible for violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law. These include indiscriminate attacks using cluster ammunitions, as well as two incidents of shooting, wounding and torture of Russian prisoners of war, which are war crimes. Accountability for these cases is also a necessity.”
- Cutaway: Medium shot, journalists with speaker at the podium.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Erik Møse, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The Commission has concluded that Russian armed forces have committed indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, which are violations of international humanitarian law. Such attacks have impacted objects which are purely civilian in nature, such as residential buildings, hospitals, shops, and places with large concentrations of civilians.”
- Cutaway: medium shot of journalists in the press room.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Pablo de Greiff, Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The Commission has collected evidence showing a widespread pattern of summary executions and has concluded that Russian authorities have committed unlawful killings of civilians or persons in areas which came under their control.”
- Cutaway: medium shot of journalists in the press room.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Pablo de Greiff, Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The Commission has further concluded that Russian authorities have committed unlawful transfers and deportations of civilians or of other protected persons, both men and women within Ukraine, or to the Russian Federation respectively. This is a war crime.”
- Cutaway: medium shot with speakers on podium.
- SOUNDBITE (ENGLISH) Ms. Jasminka Džumhur, Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine: “The Commission has concluded that in the area they controlled, some members of Russian forces committed the war crimes of rape, which also amounts to torture, sexual violence and the corresponding human rights violations. Acts of forced nudity can be a form of sexual violence and may constitute the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity.”
- Various cutaways of journalists and speakers in the press conference room.
Release of comprehensive report by the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine to the Human Rights Council
Speakers:
- Erik Møse, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine
- Jasminka Džumhur, Commissioner
- Pablo de Greiff, Commissioner
STORYLINE
Russian troops committed a “wide range” of violations across Ukraine, many of which amount to war crimes, UN Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine reports
Russian forces in Ukraine faced fresh accusations of war crimes on Thursday as UN-appointed independent human rights investigators released the latest findings of their ongoing probe.
“Russian authorities have committed numerous violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, in addition to a wide range of war crimes, including the war crime of excessive incidental death, injury or damage, wilful killings, torture, unlawful confinement, rape, as well as deportation,” said Mr. Erik Møse, Chair of the Commission of Inquiry in Geneva.
In addition, Russian repeated attacks against Ukraine’s energy grid since 10 October 2022 left hundreds of thousands without power in freezing temperatures. With “the use of torture by Russian authorities, these attacks may amount to crimes against humanity”, added Mr. Møse, before calling for further investigation into the allegations.
The Commission’s latest report is based on almost 600 interviews, as well as satellite pictures and inspections of detention places and graves.
The Commissioners also found a “limited number” of apparent violations by Ukrainian forces. “These include indiscriminate attacks using cluster ammunitions, as well as two incidents of shooting, wounding, and torture of Russian prisoners of war, which are war crimes. Accountability for these cases is also a necessity,” insisted Jasminka Džumhur, one of the Commissioners of Inquiry.
The bulk of the investigators’ report concerned allegations against Russia. They concluded that its armed forces had committed "indiscriminate and disproportionate" attacks on Ukraine, used torture, killed civilians outside combat and failed to take measures to spare the Ukrainian population. For Mr. Møse, “such attacks have impacted objects which are purely civilian in nature, such as residential buildings, hospitals, shops and places with large concentrations of civilians”.
Deportation and systematic torture
A key finding of the report relates to “widespread” unlawful confinement in areas controlled by Russian armed forces, going hand in hand with “consistent” methods of torture.
Commissioner Pablo de Greiff said that Russian authorities had committed “unlawful transfers and deportations of civilians or of other protected persons, both men and women within Ukraine, or to the Russian Federation respectively. This is a war crime.”
The Commission also presented information and testimony suggesting a widespread pattern of summary executions and concluded that Russian authorities had committed unlawful killings of civilians or persons, in areas which came under their control.
Sexual violence
The report highlights “numerous” instances of rape and sexual violence committed by Russian authorities, notably during house searches and in detention. According to the Commission, victims were men, women and children, from four to 82 years old.
“The Commission has concluded that in the area they controlled, some members of Russian forces committed the war crimes of rape, which also amounts to torture, sexual violence, and the corresponding human rights violations. Acts of forced nudity can be a form of sexual violence and may constitute the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity,” said Ms. Džumhur.
A commission of inquiry is the most powerful tool available to the UN Human Rights Council to scrutinize abuses and rights violations around the world.
The Commission’s three members are independent human rights experts. The Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine was created during an urgent debate shortly after Russia’s invasion on 24 February last year.
The report calls for all perpetrators of violations and crimes to be held accountable through judicial proceedings in accordance with international human rights standards, “either at the national or the international level”.
Ends
Teleprompter
OK.
Good afternoon.
A very warm welcome to all of you and thank you for joining us here at the Pali de Nacion in Geneva.
We're pleased to have with us all three members of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine, who wanted to take this opportunity to share with you the findings of their latest report.
With us are the Chair of the Commission.
In the middle, Mr Eric Morsay, and to his right is Miss Yasmika Jumor.
And finally, on on the far side is Mr Pablo de Grief.
As you may know, the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine was created by the Human Rights Council one year ago in March of 2022.
This report will be officially presented to the Council on Monday, March 20th, although that session may run a little longer into the next day.
Now I'll turn immediately to the Chair, Mr Mercer, for the opening remarks from and then from the fellow Commissioners, and then we'll go to you for your questions.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
We are here today to present the Commission's findings since the beginning of its mandate.
In our oral update to the Human Rights Council last September and the report to the General Assembly in October last year, we focused on events in late February and March 2022 in the four regions Kiev, Sharnihiv, Arkib and Sumi.
The current comprehensive report covers 9 regions in Ukraine and includes findings related to events that occurred between 24th of February 2022 and mid January 2023.
The Commission has travelled 8 times to Ukraine, where it visited 56 cities, towns and settlements and also travelled to Estonia and Georgia.
The Commission interviewed 348 women and 247 men in person and remotely.
Some interviews also described events in the Russian Federation.
While the Commission could establish A dialogue with Ukraine authorities and receive responses to its questions, it regrets that it was not able to establish such a dialogue with the Russian Federation.
The Commission has assessed the information it has gathered and received impartially and has been informed all its functions in total independence from any country or entity.
Operating in a very crowded accountability space in which many actors are accumulating vast amounts of information, the Commission early paid particular attention to coordination.
It also identified patterns of violations and recognised the importance of a broad understanding of accountability that includes both judicial and non judicial measures.
The ongoing armed conflict in Ukraine has had devastating effects at various levels.
Human losses and the general disregard for the life of civilians, as regularly reported by the **** Commissioner for Human Rights, are shocking.
The number of internally displaced persons or those seeking refuge abroad is the highest in Europe since the Second World War.
The destruction of essential infrastructure, schools, health facilities, residential buildings and other facilities has had an immense impact on people's life.
The effects of the aggression, both on people and on the country will not be overcome without great effort and commitment.
The aggression has also had effects abroad and has caused suffering and hardship in many in countries that for many in countries that have nothing to do with the conflict.
The Commission has concluded that the Russian authorities have committed numerous violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, in addition to a wide range of war crimes, including the war crime of excessive incidental death, injury or damage, wilful killings, torture, inhuman treatment, unlawful confinement, ****, as well as unlawful transfer and deportation.
The Commission has also found that the waves of attacks from 10 October 222 on Ukraine's energy related infrastructure by the Russian armed forces and the use of torture by Russian authorities may amount to crimes against humanity.
The Commission recommends further investigations.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces were responsible or likely responsible for a limited number of violations investigated.
We will come back to this later in the introduction.
Regarding conduct of hostilities, the Commission has concluded that Russian armed forces have committed indiscriminate and disproportional disproportionate attacks, which are violations of international humanitarian law.
Such attacks have impacted objects which are purely civilian in nature, such as residential buildings, hospitals, shops and places with large concentrations of civilians.
According to the Office of the **** Commissioner for Human Rights, such attacks have caused 90.3% of the casualties of the conflict.
The multiple examples of such attacks and the failure to take feasible precautions show a pattern of this regard on the part of Russian armed forces for the requirement to minimise civilian harm.
Turning to the waves of attacks on energy infrastructure in Ukraine, which Russian armed forces launched from 10 October 2022, the Commission has concluded that these attacks were disproportionate and that they constitute war crimes.
The Commission recommends further investigations to clarify whether all elements of crimes against humanity are fully met, including to what extent the policy was directed against the civilian population and whether they accumulated impact on the civilian population over time is equivalent to that of the enumerated acts that constitute crimes against humanity.
When it comes to violations of personal integrity, the Commission wishes to emphasise that they should not only be seen as violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, but also as sources of intense trauma for the survivors or victims family members.
Some have told the Commission of the distress they feel after such an ordeal.
The Commission has collected evidence showing a widespread pattern of summary executions and has concluded that Russian authorities have committed unlawful killings of civilians or persons or stay combat in areas which came under their control.
The Commission has also documented a pattern of attacks against civilians travelling in vehicles in areas that were under Russian armed forces control in February and March 2022.
Consequently, Russian armed forces have committed or likely have committed indiscriminate attacks against civilians or civilian objects, which are violations of the right to life and in certain cases are war crimes.
In some cases, they did not do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked were not civilian or civilian objects.
Some attacks appeared to intentionally target civilians, which would make them war crimes.
The Commission has also established a pattern of widespread unlawful confinement by Russian forces, both in Ukraine and in the Russian Federation, targeting wide categories of civilians and other protected persons, frequently in the absence of valid reasons or without respect for procedural requirements.
Conditions of detention were generally inhuman.
Victims were men and women of all ages, as well as children.
Such confinement constitutes war crimes and is also a violation of the rights to liberty and security of persons.
The Commission has further concluded that Russian authorities have committed unlawful transfers and deportations of civilians or of other protected persons, both men and women, within Ukraine or to the Russian Federation, respectively.
This is a war crime.
The Commission has found that torture and inhuman treatment by Russian authorities against people they detained in Ukraine and in the Russian Federation have been widespread.
Certain categories of people, in particular those suspected of providing any form of support to the Ukrainian armed forces, were the main targets of torture.
Most victims were men.
Both civilians and prisoners of war were tortured.
The Commission documented the existence of dedicated places of detention where Russian authorities routinely confined, interrogated, and tortured people.
It identified tortured methods that were used consistently in several of these detention facilities.
These acts amount to war crimes and violations of human rights.
The Commission has found that Russian authorities used torture in a systematic and widespread manner in the areas that it has investigated.
There were elements of planning and availability of resources which indicated that the Russian authorities may have committed torture as crimes against humanity.
The Commission recommends further investigations to ascertain whether those violations have been committed in furtherance of a specific policy regarding sexual and gender based violence.
The Commission has documented cases affecting women, men and girls aged from 4 to 82 in Ukraine and while detained in the Russian Federation.
Russian authorities have committed sexual violence during house searches and against victims they had confined.
In addition, there were situations in which Russian authorities imposed forced nudity in detention at checkpoints and filtration facilities.
The Commission has concluded that in a rare they controlled some members of Russian force committed the war crimes of ****, which also amounts to torture, sexual violence and the corresponding human rights violations.
Acts of forced nudity can be a form of sexual violence and may constitute the war crime of outrageous up in personal dignity in occupied territories.
The Commission has found that holding of so-called referendums organised between 23rd and 27th September 2022 in the Donetsk, Hudson, Lugansk and the Prussia regions concerning the annexations to Russian Federation disregarded to Ukrainian Constitution which regulates referendums.
The annexations of four regions is unlawful, based upon the principles of international law.
In addition, Russian authorities have exercised a physical or moral caution against civilians in occupied areas in violation of international humanitarian law.
The Commission has investigated the situation of force transfers and deportations of children within Ukraine and to the Russian Federation.
The figures provided by parties vary greatly.
It it identified several situations in which such transfers and deportations took place.
In incidents examined by the Commission, the ones to trace and fight parents or family members fell primarily on the children.
The Commission has concluded that situation it has examined or violated international humanitarian law and amount of war crimes.
Russian authorities violated the obligation under international humanitarian law to facilitate in every possible way to reunion of families dispersed because of the armed conflict.
Such conduct may also amount to the war crime of unjustifiable delay in the reparation of civilians.
In addition, the Commission documented that Russian officials have taken legal and policy measures regarding Ukrainian children deported to Russian Federation.
This includes citizenship and family replacement measures which may have a profound implication on child's identity.
Such measures are in violation of the right of child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations without unlawful interference as recognised by international humanitarian rights law.
Human rights law clinic now to Ukrainian violations.
The Commission has in limited number of cases finded that Ukrainian Armed forces very likely responsible for violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law.
This include indiscriminate attacks using cluster munitions as well as two incidents of shooting, wounding and torture of Russian prisoners of war, which are war crimes.
Accountability for these cases is also necessity in light of wide range of abuses and violations.
The Commission recommends that Russian Federation immediately says its aggression against Ukraine.
All perpetrators of violations and crimes are to be held accountable through judicial proceedings in accordance with international human rights standards.
But the **** number of criminal accountability actors at national, regional and international level.
The Commission recommends that coordination of accountability initiatives be strengthened and that the voice of victims and survivors are duly taken into account.
In addition to criminal accountability, the Commission recommends that all necessary steps are taken in the in order to ensure that all victims rights the truth is satisfied and that they eventually obtained redress and remedy, including compensation and rehabilitation.
In this respect, the Commission recommends to Ukraine as preliminary steps towards a comprehensive reparation programme to establish our victim registry as institutional portal for better coordination of available government services to victims.
Mental health is important component that should be given appropriate attention in Ukraine and current efforts should be further strengthened.
Thank you for your attention and we welcome your questions.
Thank you and thank you commissioners for your opening statements.
And now we can go to the questions in the room.
First there, if you could please identify yourself and the organisation you work for.
Yes, I'm Gabrielle de Tolfeiber from Murders News Agency, probably have a two-part question.
Some legal experts believe that when taken altogether, the crimes described in the report could amount to genocide.
Do you share that opinion?
And a second question about Mariupol, the Commission has assessed that was assessing whether the bombardment and seizure the city may constitute a crime against humanity and recommends further investigation.
How will it be possible in the in the current circumstances and given the your inability to access the city to further investigate and just curious about the methods you might use to do that.
Thank you.
When it comes to your first question about genocide, we have not found, I'm sorry, microphone when we as regards your first question about genocide, we have not found that there has been a genocide within Ukraine.
They said.
We are of course, following all kind of evidence within this area and we have noted that there are some aspects which may raise questions with respect to that crime, for instance, certain utterances in Russian media which are targeting groups, but we have not yet pointed any conclusion there.
We will be continuing this further.
Regarding Mariupol, it is of course the situation that we've not been able to be there.
We realise the importance of looking into that situation and we have tried to get as much information through our investigators by contacting witnesses with whom they have access.
They have provided A considerable picture of what happened in Mariupol.
It is difficult for us without having been there to conclude with respect to any particular legal term beyond what we have already concluded in the report.
But also this is something which we will follow closely in further investigation.
We recommend this to be continued.
OK, thank you.
I think we had a question over here first.
Thank you, Nina Larson with AFP.
So I was wondering on the on the issue of the children, I know you couldn't confirm or verify the the numbers that were given, but do you have any estimate from who the people you've talked to about how many we might be talking about?
And on the issue of accountability, I was wondering where you're at in drawing up for instance, a list of possible perpetrators and attributing actual accountability and how far up that might go?
Thank you.
I will start and then share the answers with my colleagues.
Now as regards children, it is a problem in for our investigations and the figures have varied so greatly coming with different figures from the parties and also the difficulty to establish figures through investigations exactly because they are so varying and also because it's difficult for us to get into the territories where persons who have allegedly been transferred are residing.
So this shows the complexity of this in the investigation.
Others will complete me with this.
And then when it comes to accountability, as you know, it follows from our mandate that we have both the general accountability aspect in our work and an individual accountability in our work.
And we have throughout our investigations of course looked for individuals that may be accountable.
We have gathered the information and we therefore have information available which may form a list to be submitted to the relevant authorities in the UN.
Please thank you for question.
I will add answer related to children deported to Russian Federation exactly Piguras are not proper because we have different information from state parties from Russian Federation and from Ukraine, but also official information from Ukrainian side is about 16,500 registered cases.
That what is more important is situations which brings children to to be deported to Ukrainian, to Russian Federation and their current position.
We registered 3 situations, First children from institutions, second, children of parents who lost life in the conflict and 3rd situation as children which whose parents were detained or infiltration camps.
But also we are now speaking on three categories of children which were deported without they will and also without consent of their parents or guardians and so on.
We also find that the cases where children were relocated a transfer on temporary occupied territory of Ukraine or to Russian federations with consent of parents, because they were invited to spend some period of time in camps, in summer camps and they are still there.
That what we during our mission recognised as a problem is establishment of contacts and that parents are pushed to go through whole countries and via Russian Federation to pick up their children.
And it is really serious issue because a period of time will affected children identity and their contacts with parents and other relatives.
And I will add a few remarks about the question on accountability.
The Chair has already made a reference to a list that will be handed in due time to the **** Commissioner.
But I want to add that the Commission from its earlier stages adopted a broad understanding of accountability that includes, of course, contributions to criminal justice, which will be a result both of our investigations and our efforts to coordinate with other accountability actors in this extraordinarily crowded accountability space that the Ukraine has become.
But also it seeks to make contributions to the satisfaction of non judicial forms of accountability as well, including the rights of victims to truth, to reparation and to guarantees of non recurrence.
And we seek to make recommendations on those fronts as well.
In fact, we take one of the contributions that the Commission makes to this debate is not only its contributions to criminal accountability, but the reminder that the international community has commitment to a broader understanding of accountability as well.
Hi Imogen folks, BBC.
It's also about accountability as your report talks about systematic violations patterns.
So I'm wondering with this list, is it confined to people who are operating on the battlefield?
Does it extend to people making the policy to government?
The the, of course, the point of departure is what we see on the ground, but what we have been doing consistently is to see whether we can go upwards in the echelons trying to seek higher levels that could be partly persons at the military level and partly even higher up.
At this stage, we have not in the report addressed specifically individual paths, but we have indicated that we have identified persons that we think are of interest in this area.
And in principle, of course, all levels fall under the mandate of the Commission.
OK, thank you.
Next question, Julia Crawford from Swiss Info and Justice Info.
You're recommending further investigations on crimes against humanity, for example.
I had understood that your mandate was now ending.
Is it likely to be renewed?
It's up to the Human Rights Council to decide.
We are awaiting the session of the Human Rights Council and we'll know the answer by the end of this human of this session.
And that's where we stand from the point of view of the Commission.
Thank you, Eric.
OK, let's go to the next question.
We'll go to some of those who are joining us online.
First, we can we'll take a question from Lauren Ciero from the Swiss News Agency.
Yeah, thank you for the press conference.
Some of my questions have been addressed, but let me ask additional ones.
First, now that you have the full picture of the first year of, of the war, does the pattern of war crimes tend to increase from months to months?
And then secondly, Mr Moser, you have a lot of experience dealing with the international crimes in your, in your previous, in your previous mandates, what is different?
You mentioned the crowded space of accountability and also the varying figures between parties.
What is different this time with that kind of fog of of information that might be spread by by the parties?
What is different?
Thank you.
Thank you very much for the question.
The question of what is different can be answered from many different perspectives.
Of course, one big difference is that this is a conflict that involves power, that has nuclear arms, that is a permanent member of the Security Council.
And that of course, makes it different from some other conflicts.
There are experts in military warfare that draw analogies in the way that this conflict is being fought much more to the First World War and trench warfare than to more recent conflict.
And some of the destruction and the violence that one sees in the country I think gives some credence to that analogy.
So there are many differences and parallels with other conflicts.
I think that this is a Commission that is very deeply aware of the interest that that this particular conflict has generated in the international community.
We, of course, undertook to satisfy our mandate to the best of our abilities.
We have profited from the interest that the international community has given to this conflict.
We, of course, hope that, for example, some of the discussions about accountability will not be simply specific to this case, but would be more general and that the solutions that are given to this problem are solutions that can also be applied in other conflicts as well.
So this is the beginning of a question that is general and complicated, but these are some of my initial reactions.
Thank you, Pablo.
OK.
We'll take another question on mine from Gabriella Sotomayor.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I'm Gabriela Sotoma, your Mexican journalist for Processo magazine.
So the, the photograph that that you present to us today is really dramatic, but it seems that it will this war will not have an end in the short term since it seems that none of the parties wants to, to sit down at the table to negotiate peace.
So my question is, I don't know if it's a little bit naive, but what concrete measures can the international community take to prevent these crimes from continuing, continuing to happen?
Because This is why the UN was created, No.
So what can be done concretely?
Is there something?
Thank you so much.
Thank you for your question and we really discussed this issue among us and it it is not possible to give a full answer on that, but solutions are options under previous experiences.
Any war which happened before finished by some finished by peace and options of peace requires stronger engagement of international community.
Problem here additional problem is the fact that one of the state parties involved in the conflict is a permanent member of Security Council.
Definitely accountability, criminal accountability to bring persons responsible for, for, for, for violations and abuses is one of our measures to prevent not only this and continuation of this crime, but also to prevent such conflicts in further.
And the second very important action that both of that Russian Federation must immediately to stop aggression on Ukrainian Federation, that that is a first step to stop lost civilians, human resources and also destruction of infrastructure.
What is 1 of elements of specific elements of this conflict?
Thank you.
OK.
Next question from Antonio Brotto from FA.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
I remember that in the preliminary report in September or or better said in the press conference that you gave in September, you mentioned that you could individualise more who are the perpetrators of these war crimes?
Who are the Russian leaders and officials that are directly responsible?
Why you haven't been able to to do so now?
And I have another question if I may.
I think that you didn't mention crimes against humanity in your first report in September, but now you are mentioning why this change?
Thank you.
I will answer the second question and then we will share the first one.
The point is simply that this is a Commission which is in particular a fact finding Commission.
We have our 24 investigators, we have the three commissioners and we are conscientiously, impartially, independently going through all the evidence that we are receiving and that we are soliciting partly on the ground and partly elsewhere.
Since September we have much more information than we had in September.
And as a consequence of that and also because there is a clear picture with respect to partly torture, which is because now we have not only four regions as in September, but we have actually included nine regions in our assessments.
Plus new developments since September has LED us to on the fact based approach to reach the conclusion that there may be a crimes against humanity situation with respect to two situations as we explained in the beginning of this press conference.
And then, if I may add only on this first question, it is very important to look fact that since 10 October there has happened very systematic attack on infrastructure, energy heating and combination system of of energy and heating what affected millions of civilians in Ukraine.
It is not only simple that was happened distortion of objects, it is affected their lives in meaning in health institutions, access to education for children has serious impact on mental health.
It is not only once the systematic widespread attacks on infrastructure and those two elements brings us to conclusion that maybe happened a crime against humanity.
When we are speaking on torture, it is also we we recognise the dedication of resources, places, organisation and everything brings us to the conclusion that maybe crime against humanity happened.
So I will add just a few remarks about the other question on the individualisation of responsibility of perpetrators.
The commitment always was, of course, to try to make a contribution to accountability and in this case particularly to judicial accountability.
I don't think that there's a difference at all in our position between the previous press conference and this one.
In fact, we are asserting that we have made progress in the identification of individuals and, for example, of units that were present and to whom responsibility can be attributed to different acts.
What we are saying, which is again not different from what we said in September, is that that list will be turned over to the **** Commissioner.
The list was never meant to be made public as part of the report.
The list is being constructed.
It is growing as our investigation progresses and therefore far from a difference.
We have been very assiduously following the path that we announced we would follow in our press conference back then.
Thank you.
OK, let's take another one online from Vegard Kruger.
Go ahead.
Yes.
Hello, Norwegian journalist.
Has Russia contributed in any way to clarifying whether war crimes have taken place?
And if they have, how, how they donate?
If they have not contributed or contributed a little, what do you think about their lack of contribution to clarify the matter?
Thank you.
So we clarifying the report and we did so again in the introduction to this press conference that we have received no collaboration from the Russian Federation.
We have, of course, sought to establish a meaningful dialogue with them, as we have established with Ukrainian authorities.
It is obvious that a full accounting of some of the violations that we are looking into, for example, the transfer of children, the transfer of people who have been detained in Ukraine but have been deported to the Russian Federation.
All those things would be much easier to clarify if we had the full collaboration of Russian authorities, but we have not had that.
That doesn't make our job easier.
However, it doesn't make it impossible either.
We have sought alternative sources of information.
We have found some of them in people that, for example, have gone through the filtration or detention camps within the Russian Federation.
We have been able to contact children that have spent time in the Russian Federation and that have returned to Ukraine.
And of course, we also employ other means of investigation besides direct interviews with the victims.
We examine documents, we examine satellite information.
So again, it would be easier if we had collaboration, but we are not deterred from trying to complete our investigation to the best of our abilities.
Thank you.
OK.
Next to Yuichi Mori.
Thank you for taking my question.
I'm Yuichi Mori from Japan's Yomi newspaper.
I'd like to know the main difference between this report and October's one.
What do you think the major difference?
What are the new findings in this report?
Thank you.
There are quite a few differences, and the main difference is, of course, there is a broader geographical scope.
Secondly, there is a deeper substantive scope.
Thirdly, there are more topics included and I think this is the way I would analyse the report.
In a nutshell, that's the main difference.
If I may, if I may add one more comment about this.
Of course, with the passage of time and with the accumulation of cases, we are now in a much better position to analyse patterns than we were at the beginning of the investigation, when the sample for each category of violation was significantly smaller.
Now we have a larger sample, not just numerically but coming from a more diverse set of regions within the country, and that ability to analyse patterns is, of course crucially important for us and a big difference between the current report and the previous reports.
It is well known that there are certain categories of international crimes that depend on the identification of patterns, and therefore we have made progress in that direction in a way that in September we were in no position to make.
And although that work has not concluded, it is noteworthy that we are making progress in that direction as well.
Thank you, Pablo.
OK.
Next to John Zaracostas.
Yes, good afternoon.
I was following my colleagues question.
It's John Zaracostas with France 24 and The Lancet, the medical journal.
I was following up on my colleagues question concerning the list.
If you could elaborate why you did not identify any of the perpetrators, even though you mentioned and you thought the Commission has developed a separate list of identified perpetrators and military units responsible for crimes and violations.
Last week in the Human Rights Commission, the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in South Sudan identified perpetrators in their report to the Commission, which is a very interesting development.
My question is why you have not done so?
And also with regards to the attacks on core infrastructure on energy since last October, what other precedents do we have where people have been bought before a court for similar crimes?
Where are the precedents in international law that we can look for 1st about the list.
What we've done is simply as we see it, following the normal practise of the commissions of inquiries.
Of course, each Commission of an inquiry can choose its own procedure and choose its own approach.
And all these approaches are of course commendable to for our purposes.
This is a one year report.
This is our first mandate ending.
We have submitted a report in conformity with the normal way such reports are written and also in conformity with how these this information is dealt with.
We will follow the normal procedure of providing the names to the **** Commissioner's Office later in.
I think we cannot exclude a different model later, but this is the model we which is the normal model most, most extended and and that's the one we have chosen at this stage.
And when it comes to to to comparisons with other conflicts, I think that is a very broad and difficult question.
Many of us here in this room has have experience from other places with other conflicts.
It's always difficult to to compare conflicts, but it's clear that there are other conflicts which are similar to this one.
But to go into comparisons between conflicts, it it really has to be done within the context of the conflict itself.
And it's in with that framework we have progressed with our mandate.
OK, thank you, Eric.
Let's go next to Lisa Shrine from the from VOA.
Thank you.
Yes, hello.
And hello to all of you.
I'd like to go back to the question of genocide, if I may, please.
The Ukrainian ambassador here in Geneva, for one, has on several occasions it mentioned that she thought that the transfer and the deportation of children to Russia was a case of erasing an ethnic group, possibly genocide, because many of these children are being adopted, they are gaining Russian citizenship and so forth.
Many are very young and will not remember their parents or Ukraine.
And so this might be a case of an effort to erase a nationality or an ethnic group.
And then along with this, Russia seems to have a war playbook, which it has used in Syria and is repeating in Ukraine, appears to be repeating in, and that is the carpet bombing of cities, the levelling of whole cities.
I don't know whether the intention is to destroy the population, but certainly a lot of cultural, important cultural items have been destroyed as a consequence of this.
This is also involved in the definition of genocide.
So I'm wondering whether this is still an issue that's, well, sort of up for grabs as far as you're concerned in terms of a future analysis.
Thank you.
Thank you for coming back to that question.
In my first answer, I said that we didn't find any evidence within the country.
And then I mentioned one example where we were exploring the situation.
There are also other examples and you have mentioned some of them in your intervention.
We are absolutely aware of these possibilities and we will pursue this.
If I remember it is being prolonged or if not, we will certainly recommend that this is being pursued.
But based on the evidence that we've been able to achieve since actually August last year until now, we have to go step by step.
And that is the reason why we here are at the stage where we are.
Where we will go depends on what we will find.
But of course, culture as you mentioned is a very important element according to the the relevant provisions.
It's clear.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're getting close to the end.
Let's take another question from Lori Hinnant from AP.
Hi, thank you.
I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about the scope of the violations you were able to document that are taking place inside the Russian Federation.
Primarily you mentioned the what's happening with children, but also what what are you seeing happening against Ukrainian adults?
Are there a particular events or periods that you can talk about that have been striking or that have changed?
Thank you for your question.
There are several violations and abuses which have been recognised by our investigation that have made on territory of Russian Federation.
First of all, when we are speaking on deportation of children, significant number of them are currently on territory of Russian federations and prolongation of establishment.
They contact with parents and other relatives.
It is a continuation of crime.
And the second issue is establishment of filtration camps.
Third is torture in detention places and in in filtration camps, testimonies of victims who returned to Ukraine, very important source of information on that, but what they suffering suffered and how torture realised in that places?
Definitely those cases, cases of torture, transfer of children and keeping of children without contacts with parents and the establishment of detention facilities, filtration camps, main violations made on territory of Ukraine.
If I miss something, my colleagues will add.
OK, thank you.
Let me read one question from Stefan Shokor, who's based in Vienna.
He asks, are there records of foreign mercenaries fighting in Ukraine and their involvement in war crimes, which could lead to prosecution back home?
There have been many reports about citizens of Serbia fighting on the side of Russian forces.
Do you have any comment on that?
We definitely have not registered because we have not focused on that issue.
For us, it's more important to be focused on violation of international humanitarian law, human rights law and abuses that bring tough crimes.
We didn't investigate those cases, but in our report we recommended that all military and other groups, commercial groups should be take out of this conflict because we registered such groups on involved in the conflict.
No, we didn't registered individual involvements of foreigner combatants.
OK, thank you.
We'll take one last question from Emma Farge from Reuters.
Thanks.
I couldn't see any mention of the word Wagner anywhere in your report.
I was wondering, was that deliberate?
Thanks.
Thank you very much for the question.
We do talk and just make a just mentioned that it is one of our recommendations and in our conference room paper to be delivered later, we do make reference to commercial military companies as being a problem in this conflict as in many others in which companies of this sort are engaged in our investigations thus far we have not individualised any particular group.
We just note the presence of companies of this sort and and for reasons that are very well known, including the fact that they are not part of the usual line of commands of the formal military, the fact that very often a dynamic of competition is developed between them that leads in fact to increased violence.
I'm Latin American and I'm very familiar with the fact of how these dynamics and develop between groups competing for attention and for benefits from others actually aggravate a conflict rather than provide a solution for it.
So yes, Wagner is not specifically mentioned in the short report.
The generic category of a commercial military and security companies will be mentioned in our longer report.
Thank you, Pablo.
So that brings us to the end of this press conference.
Do you have any concluding remarks any of you to add?
No, the only thing must be that we really appreciate the interest while everyone who partly attended here and also those who were with us remotely.
It has been a rather hectic time until now, the last months.
And for us, it is a good feeling to see that there is so much interest in the work that we have been doing.
So thank you very much for the interest you have shown.
OK, Thank you, Eric, and thank you all for joining us again.
On that note, we end this press conference.
Have a good day.
Thanks.