From the Frontline to the Courtroom: How Ukraine Is Scaling the Work with Digital Evidence of War Crimes

Today, by the order of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Oleksandr Syrskyi, a decision was adopted to scale the area of work related to the preservation and processing of information concerning possible serious violations of international humanitarian law under combat conditions. The coordination of this process will be carried out by the Military Law Enforcement Service. This concerns the integration into combat systems of an automated algorithm for the preservation and processing of information from the areas of responsibility of military units. This decision is important both for the Armed Forces of Ukraine and for the investigation of international crimes committed in Ukraine as a result of Russian aggression.

At the end of April, near the settlement of Zaliznychne in the Polohy district of Zaporizhzhia region, Russian military personnel, according to data obtained through aerial reconnaissance, executed two unarmed Ukrainian servicemen who had surrendered. Already in May, according to intercepted radio communications, a Russian commander ordered the decapitation of the deceased Ukrainian servicemen and instructed that the heads be left “in plain sight” as an element of intimidation. There are already hundreds of such facts of war crimes. What distinguishes them from other crimes? The fact that they are committed in areas of active hostilities where law enforcement agencies often have no physical access. And the possibility of establishing the circumstances of the crime and bringing those responsible to justice in the future depends on how effectively information is preserved today.

At the very beginning of the full-scale war, the idea emerged to create a mechanism that would allow the preservation of information and evidence from the battlefield, both physical and digital. It was implemented with the support of the Command of the Territorial Defence Forces, where a Working Group on the implementation of international humanitarian law and participation in the organization of legal assistance was established. This was a logical starting point. It is precisely the Territorial Defence Forces that are entrusted by law with addressing humanitarian issues under martial law. In addition, many people with civilian professional backgrounds joined the ranks of the Territorial Defence Forces, including prosecutors, lawyers, legal experts, and human rights specialists. Their expertise became important for shaping the first approaches to recording information on violations of international humanitarian law. Over the course of a year and a half, this initiative evolved into a systematic process. It involved training servicemen, preparing methodological materials, participating in issues of legal assistance, protecting cultural heritage, and creating primary algorithms for recording facts of violations and preserving evidence.

Subsequently, this area was further developed within the Unmanned Systems Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. By the order of the Commander of the Unmanned Systems Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Robert Brovdi, the first specialized unit within the structure of the Armed Forces of Ukraine was established to collect and process digital information on possible serious violations of international humanitarian law. This stage was fundamentally important because the Unmanned Systems Forces became an environment where innovation, speed of decision-making, and practical combat experience made it possible to test the model under real wartime conditions. This was not a theoretical construct, but a practical instrument designed to function amid intensive combat operations.

The standardized documentation algorithms developed by the unit relied on the capabilities of the Delta combat system. Delta, as a situational awareness system, helps the Armed Forces of Ukraine work with large volumes of information. In this case, its significance extends beyond purely military application. It creates the basis for organized work with data that may be important for the further establishment of the circumstances of events. This concerns not only individual photos or videos. Entire military information complexes generated during the ISTAR process (intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance/assessment of strike results) are of importance. Such data may help establish the chronology of an event, geolocation, the type of weapon used, troop movements, the moment prisoners of war were captured, the results of remote examination of the scene, and other circumstances without which effective criminal proceedings are often impossible.

The testing of this model within the Unmanned Systems Forces demonstrated its practical effectiveness. Within several months of operation, units of the Unmanned Systems Forces recorded 99 alleged war crimes, including killings of prisoners of war, attacks on civilian objects, killings of civilians, the use of prohibited means and methods of warfare, and torture. These results demonstrated that, given a clear algorithm, military units are capable of systematically working with such information.

At the same time, it is obvious that the scale of the war, the number of potential incidents, and the volume of digital data require a broader systemic architecture capable of taking these specific features into account. The Russian-Ukrainian war has already demonstrated how radically modern technologies have changed the nature of warfare. Unmanned systems, aerial reconnaissance tools, situational awareness platforms, satellite services, and OSINT have made the battlefield significantly more transparent. Therefore, a systemic transformation in work with digital data is now taking place. Such data has a fundamental advantage under wartime conditions. Working with it does not always require physical presence at the scene. Data from unmanned systems, aerial reconnaissance assets, situational awareness systems, satellite services, or other digital platforms may be accessible virtually 24/7. This opens the possibility for constant two-way interaction between military units, law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, and other entities involved in documentation.

That is precisely why the Commander-in-Chief’s decision on scaling is a consistent stage of development. It concerns the transition from episodic recording to a standardized operational process of collecting and processing information directly under combat conditions. This includes identifying an event, its initial recording by a unit, entering data into a digital system according to unified parameters, basic verification, proper preservation, and further transfer for use in legal procedures.

It is important that responsibility and the coordination function in this process have been assigned specifically to the Military Law Enforcement Service of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. This is the correct decision both from the perspective of the logic of the military system and from the perspective of international experience. In many states, military police are responsible for ensuring the chain of custody of information, the initial handling of materials in combat zones, and interaction with law enforcement agencies.

The next step should be the creation of a fully-fledged area for documenting violations of international humanitarian law. This would make it possible to form a systemic mechanism ensuring unified approaches to the collection, processing, and transfer of information, as well as coordination between military units, law enforcement agencies, and prosecutors. In practice, this concerns the creation of a large-scale structured archive of crimes that would accumulate and preserve information on events, evidence, persons involved, and the circumstances of violations of international humanitarian law. In a broader sense, such a system has comprehensive significance. It helps build an evidentiary base for criminal proceedings in full compliance with criminal procedure requirements, factually refute the informational narratives and disinformation of the aggressor state, and use the collected data in international diplomacy and efforts aimed at bringing perpetrators to justice. In addition, it may prove useful for intelligence, analysis of enemy tactics and practices, as well as for prevention and the consolidation of standards of compliance with international humanitarian law within the armed forces.

Ukraine should recognize the uniqueness of its own situation. No state has previously built a system for working with digital evidence of international crimes under conditions of intensive high-tech warfare. The world has never encountered such a scale of digital data generated directly in real time during hostilities. Therefore, the Ukrainian path in this sphere is unique. We are not only applying existing approaches but also shaping new practices that may become a reference point for other states in the future. Importantly, these approaches are being formed not in theory but through the practical work of military personnel and specialists directly working with digital information under combat conditions. In this context, special gratitude should be expressed to the Unmanned Systems Forces, the Counterintelligence Department of the Security Service of Ukraine, and the Military Law Enforcement Service, which have become some of the key environments for the formation and development of these practices.

At the same time, the development of this system should correlate with global trends in the field of digital evidence. In this context, Ukraine’s ratification of the Second Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime is important. It is specifically aimed at strengthening international cooperation and mechanisms for access to digital evidence. For Ukraine, this creates additional preconditions for integrating its own experience into the global system of work with digital evidence and international legal cooperation.

Ultimately, the current decision has significance far beyond the internal organization of work within the Armed Forces of Ukraine. It creates the foundation for ensuring that information concerning possible serious violations of international humanitarian law is not lost in the chaos of war, but instead preserved, structured, and capable of being used in the legal sphere. The war will end sooner or later. But it is precisely the information preserved today that will determine whether tomorrow we will be able to prove the circumstances of crimes and bring those responsible to justice.