War crimes in Ukraine: ‘People are capable of all conceivable atrocities’

For a year now, an independent commission of the United Nations Human Rights Council has been investigating war crimes in Ukraine. Your current report concludes that Russian troops commit numerous war crimes. Norwegian lawyer Erik Møse chairs the committee and regularly travels to the country himself.

Mr. Møse, you have been investigating possible war crimes in Ukraine for over a year. Was there a moment that you particularly remember?
Eric Moses: We have been to Ukraine a total of eight times so far. But if I had to name a specific situation, it would probably be Boucha.

After the Russian soldiers retreated, hundreds of bodies were found in Bucha in the spring of 2022, most of them showing signs of torture. How did you experience the situation?
We were there after the events, walking the streets, interviewing eyewitnesses, seeing pictures of the atrocities. They have gone all over the world. These moments are remembered.

>> All current developments in the live ticker

Bucha is just one of many examples of alleged war crimes committed by the Russian military. What has your committee discovered so far?
We have identified numerous violations of international law and human rights: deliberate killings, attacks on civilians, unlawful detention, torture, rape, forced displacement and child abduction. Some of these amount to war crimes.

How do you work in committee, how do you collect evidence?
We drive to the areas where we suspect relevant evidence based on our investigation. So far, we have visited more than ten regions of the country, visited 56 places and conducted interviews with about 600 people. On the spot, it is mainly about identifying witnesses. Then we need to clarify whether we can corroborate the statements with other facts.

But how do you determine whether an eyewitness is credible?
As a rule, we always try to speak to and follow up with at least two witnesses if anything is unclear or doubtful. When you talk to several people, it often quickly becomes clear whether their statements point in the same direction. In addition, there are the aforementioned site visits. This material, analyzed by various experts from the Commission’s team and combined with evidence collected from other authorities or organisations, provides an overall picture. This gives us enough basis to classify something as credible or not credible. You can think of it a bit like a lawsuit in a courtroom. It is important that we as the Commission base our conclusions on our own investigations. It would not be enough to rely only on what others have done.

You have spoken to hundreds of eyewitnesses so far. Can you recall a specific conversation that is representative of all crimes?
I want to tell about a woman who fled from another region of Ukraine. She was traveling with her children and had nothing left. We met her in a makeshift refugee shelter. She looked around and said, “Where are we going to live next week? How should I move on with my life?” For me, these sentences represent the suffering of so many people in Ukraine.

What information do you rely on when deciding where to launch an on-site investigation? Do you receive information from the Ukrainian government?
We receive information from a wide variety of sources: private individuals, international organisations, government agencies, but also reports from journalists. Our information may also come from international and national non-governmental organizations. It is important that we are independent when deciding where to investigate in Ukraine. The mandate given to us by the UN Human Rights Council emphasizes this independence and we strictly adhere to it.

In recent days, videos have been made public of Wagner mercenaries allegedly beheading Ukrainian prisoners of war. How do you deal with such things?
Videos are particularly challenging because we all know how difficult it is to judge whether they are authentic or not. The videos you refer to have only recently appeared. If we consider the material to be authentic, it naturally becomes part of our research.

But you can not investigate in the occupied territories and very close to the front.
That’s correct. We only have limited access, on-site investigation is not possible. We will have to try to prove the events at a later date.

How hard is it to be patient when the world seems so impatient for Russia to be held accountable for its crimes?
I don’t think it’s a matter of patience or impatience. Rather, it’s about being professional and conscientious and doing your job to the best of your ability. And I would say that the many visits and interviews show that we have achieved quite a lot so far.

How do you deal with everything you see yourself? You have been dealing with war crimes and human rights violations for decades, you have seen a lot of brutality and malice.
No one is immune to cruelty and what one encounters. But if you have a job, whether as a judge or in any other capacity, that’s what you need to focus on. In a way, you have to put your own feelings aside.

Every war inevitably leads to war crimes. On the Russian side, do you see a particular pattern in this war that differs from other wars? Crimes organized systematically?
Indeed, we try to look for patterns and have found them in various crimes, for example in cases of premeditated murder, torture, rape and attacks on people on the run. But whether there is a specific plan behind it is difficult to determine. The main question is whether the acts can also be regarded as crimes against humanity.

Why is that important?
One of the implicit criteria for a crime against humanity is that there is a strategy behind it, and that requires a certain amount of planning. So far we have not come to the conclusion that crimes against humanity, that is, systematic attacks against the civilian population, are taking place in Ukraine. But we continue our investigation.

Do you have direct contact with the Russian authorities?
We have contacted the Russian authorities to establish possible cooperation and also to obtain information. We didn’t succeed.

The commission’s report states that Ukrainian soldiers also committed some crimes. How serious are they?
We have documented a small number of violations of the law by the Ukrainian armed forces, including indiscriminate attacks with cluster munitions and landmines, and two incidents of mistreatment of prisoners of war. We are also in contact with the Ukrainian authorities about this.

There are some left-wing politicians in Germany who try to put Russian crimes into perspective in this way. Can you tell us what you have learned so far? Are Ukrainian and Russian crimes even comparable, both in number and severity of cases?
It’s not comparable. Our research shows that a large number of crimes are committed on the Russian side and only a small number on the Ukrainian side.

In Europe, even after more than a year, this war is still incomprehensible to many people. We saw the pictures of Bucha, Mariupol, Kharkov and other places. Is this war worse and more brutal than others?
I find it difficult to compare conflict, let alone measure human suffering. In some conflicts, crimes are committed with primitive weapons, others with modern weapons. But they are all committed with the utmost brutality.

You were, among other things, a judge at the European Court of Human Rights and president of the International Criminal Court for Rwanda. Are you still amazed at what humans are capable of?
Humans are capable of committing all kinds of atrocities imaginable. That doesn’t surprise me anymore.

You once said that any of us can get mean when the pressure is high enough.
When you hear every day, “If you’re not with us, you’re against us,” when propaganda becomes a threat, or when the fate of your country is at stake, then yes, I think most people given pause.

Can you identify individuals in your investigation who could be the perpetrators?
In all cases we investigate, we try to identify the individual perpetrators and the military units responsible. We also always try to clarify whether higher authorities are involved and responsible. But this is a complicated task for many reasons. For example, if you take military units: local people are exchanged, officers are exchanged.

Is that one of the reasons why proving war crimes in court is so difficult? A case takes years to build and few actually lead to convictions.
I see it differently. It’s not that hard to prove war crimes. Think of all the people convicted of war crimes before the International Criminal Court.

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
That’s correct. Due to the capacity of international courts, crimes committed by the top people are prosecuted because that sends the strongest message: no one is above the law. The other cases are then left to the courts in Rwanda, for example. You cannot negotiate everything on an international level.

Do you think there is a chance that Russian war criminals will one day stand trial?
The Commission is not a court. We focus on establishing facts and making recommendations for accountability. In addition, some of those responsible have already been charged by the Ukrainian judicial authorities.

The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin. Do you think he will ever be convicted?
Now you want me to speculate, but I’d rather not.

Thinking ahead – and your work is not yet finished – what impact might the Commission’s findings have on the effective prosecution of war crimes in Ukraine?
Our material will be available to any court and I believe it could be useful to any institution requesting this information. That is the core and purpose of our assignment.

Is that what drives you, that you and the Commission are doing meaningful work?
It’s broader than that, it’s not just about whether a particular person will eventually stand trial. It is about contributions when requested.

This article was first published on Zeit Online. Watson may have changed the headings and subheadings. Here’s the original.