War Crimes in Ukraine and the Aggressor’s Accountability

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to provide a comprehensive academic and practical understanding of war crimes committed on the territory of Ukraine, as well as the mechanisms of international criminal liability of the aggressor state. The research is premised on the understanding that the modern accountability system encompasses interconnected procedural mechanisms related to the investigation of war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, the crime of aggression, the environmental consequences of war, and reparation claims.

The study employs the formal-legal method to analyze the norms of international criminal law, the comparative-legal method to contrast national and international jurisdictional mechanisms, and an institutional analysis of the activities of the International Criminal Court, the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression, and the Register of Damage for Ukraine. Furthermore, the method of historical analysis of post-World War II processes was applied, alongside the generalization of scientific approaches to the issues of proving, command responsibility, and the protection of victims’rights.

As a result of the research, the author’s model of an evidentiary-jurisdictional framework is substantiated. Within this framework, domestic criminal proceedings, the International Criminal Court, the specialized mechanism for the crime of aggression, joint investigation teams, the universal jurisdiction of partner states, and the compensation track are viewed not as alternative options, but as complementary tools. The study proposes to distinguish between the operational, strategic, and restorative levels of accountability: the first ensures the documentation of crimes and the adjudication of specific cases; the second aims to prove the liability of senior political and military leadership; the third links the criminal-legal assessment to future reparations.

The conclusions emphasize that the effectiveness of the international criminal liability of the aggressor state is determined by the alignment of evidentiary standards, stable inter-institutional cooperation, the avoidance of jurisdictional conflicts, and the preservation of a victim-centered approach. It is argued that for Ukraine, the critical factor is not the sheer volume of individual proceedings, but the formation of a coherent system of proof, wherein war crimes evidence can simultaneously be utilized in domestic courts, international criminal prosecution, and compensation mechanisms.