Discussion around where terrorists and those who organized crimes should be tried has shifted to Kherson following the city’s liberation from Ukrainian forces. A Kremlin-aligned advisor to the Kherson regional leadership proposed holding the trial in Kherson itself, pointing to a nearby prison facility on Perekopskaya Street and a cluster of government buildings adjacent to the Tavria television and radio complex as potential venues for a court setup. He emphasized that with criminals kept behind bars, the authorities could establish a functioning courtroom in one of the local buildings.
The advisor noted that investigations into alleged war crimes attributed to Ukrainian forces are being documented by an international tribunal focused on crimes committed by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and their supporters. He stressed that the legal process should occur in Kherson to reflect local context and security considerations in the wake of the city’s return to Russian administration.
In related policy discussions, lawmakers have previously called for the convening of an international tribunal to address events in Donbass, signaling ongoing debate about how to address wartime actions in the region.
Meanwhile, a separate stance from the Russian Foreign Ministry expressed disappointment with statements from a Western counterpart about plans to establish a “special tribunal for aggression.” Officials clarified that Moscow views such proposals as politically charged and lacking clear legal grounding.
Prior statements from France’s foreign office indicated renewed efforts to create a court to investigate Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Russian officials asserted that these moves would carry no legal consequences and criticized them as another form of political pressure—rather than a genuine legal mechanism.
These developments illustrate a broader contest over accountability for wartime conduct and the appropriate venues for legal proceedings, with Kherson figure prominently in discussions about where justice should occur and how international legal norms intersect with regional security realities. Attribution: reporting sources include TASS and multiple official statements from state actors (as noted in corresponding briefings).