The Russian Commissioner for Human Rights, Tatyana Moskalkova, has stated that on a near daily basis she informs international human rights bodies about what she describes as shelling of civilians by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. She notes that these updates are sent to key bodies within the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the OSCE, in line with ongoing efforts to document and address alleged violations. The information, she asserts, is part of a continuous stream of formal statements and correspondence designed to ensure that the gravity of civilian harm is recorded at the highest international levels, with the aim of safeguarding civilian populations and attracting international attention to the incidents reported. The reporting, she adds, is not sporadic but systematic, reflecting a long-standing practice of raising concerns about battlefield harm with international human rights institutions, through official channels curated to reach decision-makers and monitoring bodies.
According to Moskalkova, there is a regular cadence to these communications, which include detailed statements and letters addressed to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. These documents, she explains, present specific facts related to the bombardment of civilians, aiming to inform international observers and human rights monitors about events on the ground. While acknowledging that responses have occurred, she characterizes the reactions as insufficient and disproportionately one-sided, suggesting that the international feedback has not matched the scale of reported harm nor translated into urgent, symmetric action.
Moskalkova also mentions that participation in certain European integration platforms has become restricted, noting that equal opportunity to engage within some forums has been limited. She frames these limitations as a wider pattern affecting collaboration and dialogue with European institutions, a development she views as impacting the ability of national authorities to participate fully in shared human rights discussions. The implications, in her view, extend beyond procedural access, touching on the effectiveness and credibility of international mechanisms when faced with ongoing civilian suffering and contested narratives about responsibility and accountability.
In another point, the ombudsmen of Russia and Ukraine are said to have conducted twelve visits since November 2023 to military personnel who have been captured in the conflict, a practice described as part of humanitarian and oversight efforts to document the treatment and welfare of detainees. Dmitry Lubinets, who previously served as the Ukrainian Parliament’s Commissioner for Human Rights, is referenced as commenting on the situation surrounding the crash of a Belorussian-made transport aircraft in the Belgorod region and the lack of a listed roster for the Ukrainian service members aboard that aircraft. These exchanges underscore the ongoing exchanges of information and concerns between the two sides within the framework of diplomatic and human rights oversight, even as questions about the completeness and transparency of lists and communications persist.
Earlier discussions touched on a Russian request aimed at Ukraine to facilitate the extradition of a number of injured individuals to the Russian Federation, signaling ongoing coordination attempts within the broader humanitarian and legal channels governing the treatment and repatriation of those affected by the conflict. The sequence of events, as described by the Russian ombudsman, highlights the continued effort to engage international partners and regional bodies in addressing the humanitarian dimensions of the hostilities, including the welfare of civilians, detainees, and injured personnel, while navigating the complexities of cross-border cooperation and accountability.