Lithuania Extradition Spurs Hope for International Jurisdiction
Ukraine hopes that prosecutions in other countries for international crimes will become a systemic practice.
Also see
Conscription in Occupied Lands: Russia’s War Crime
Ukrainian law enforcement agencies are documenting and securing convictions against organisers of the illegal draft.
Legal experts say that the unprecedented extradition of a Russian serviceman to Lithuania for war crimes committed in Ukraine marks significant progress in efforts to boost universal jurisdiction efforts.
The suspect, Senior Sailor Margen Gadzhimagomedov, is accused of participating in the beating and torture of captives, including a Lithuanian national.
According to Ukrainian investigators, members of Russia’s 177th Separate Marine Regiment of the Caspian Flotilla organised a so-called filtration camp at an airfield in the Russian-occupied city of Melitopol in the Zaporizhzhia region between March and September 2022. In April of that year, Russian forces illegally detained several Ukrainians and a Lithuanian citizen visiting the city.
According to investigators, Gadzhimagomedov confined victims in a metal safe, choked them to the point of unconsciousness, hung them by their bound hands, doused them with cold water in freezing temperatures and tortured them with electric shocks.
He was captured by Ukrainian forces in August 2023 near Robotyne in the Zaporizhzhia region. In September 2024, Lithuanian law enforcement authorities named him and two other Russians as suspects. The other two have since been placed on Interpol’s international wanted list.
In a comment to IWPR, the prosecutor’s office emphasised the case’s significance for both Ukraine and the international community. It is the first time since the full-scale war began that a Russian serviceman has been handed over by Ukraine to a third country to ensure prosecution for war crimes.
On September 8, 2025, Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Ruslan Kravchenko, approved the suspect’s extradition to Lithuania. In turn, Lithuania guaranteed his right to a fair trial. Ukraine handed the suspect over to Lithuania on October 28, after which the Vilnius Regional Court remanded him in custody.
Based on evidence gathered by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) and its international partners, Lithuanian authorities charged him with war crimes against civilians and prisoners of war, torture, unlawful imprisonment and violations of the Geneva Conventions and the laws and customs of war, under Articles 100 and 103 (Part 1) of the criminal code.
The prosecutor general’s office told IWPR that the pre-trial investigation was ongoing. Under Lithuanian law, the Russian national faces a sentence of ten to 20 years or life imprisonment. Moreover, Lithuania’s criminal code stipulates that there is no statute of limitations for war crimes.
Oleksandr Pavlichenko, executive director of the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, told IWPR that the extradition was legally sound.
“Here, the principles of both universal and extraterritorial jurisdiction are applied by Lithuania, which has the right to prosecute this individual on its territory if the offence constitutes a war crime,” he said.
He noted several international agreements that also provided a legal framework on this issue, such as the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, which allows for joint investigations in cases that span multiple jurisdictions, as well as the European Convention on Extradition.
Kateryna Busol, an associate professor at Kyiv-Mohyla Academy and the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) noted that Lithuania had jurisdiction in this case because the victim was a Lithuanian citizen.
“The suspect’s transfer was based on the 'principle of passive personality’, which applies when the victim of a crime is a citizen of the prosecuting state,” she said. “This gives them grounds to claim jurisdiction.”
She also highlighted that Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic states and the International Criminal Court (ICC) were all members of the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) that oversees cooperation on war crimes investigations.
“Within this team, we coordinate the focus of investigations, the prioritisation of cases and what to do if victims or suspects are located outside of Ukraine. I believe the coordination within this joint investigation team is significant,” she concluded.
The prosecutor general’s office agreed that case set a precedent, arguing that it demonstrated the effectiveness of universal jurisdiction. The office confirmed that they were actively working towards ensuring this principle, which allows crimes committed in Ukraine to be prosecuted in other countries - particularly when their own citizens are among the victims - to become a systemic practice.
However, Volodymyr Yavorskyi, programme director at the Centre for Civil Liberties, said that such prosecutions remained extremely rare.
“The problem is that other countries are often reluctant to launch these investigations, even though they could,” he said. “This case moved forward because the victim is a Lithuanian citizen, which spurred the interest of investigative authorities. In cases where there are no foreign victims, we have seen virtually no investigations initiated.”
Pavlichenko noted the example of Finland, which has refused to extradite a Russian national, Yan Petrovsky to Ukraine. Petrovsky was on trial in Helsinki for war crimes committed against Ukrainians.
“Switzerland also refuses to extradite individuals on Ukrainian-issued warrants due to problems in our penitentiary system, which, in their view, has conditions that amount to cruel treatment. This is an issue Ukraine should address,” he continued. “Countries like Germany, Italy, France, Switzerland and the United Kingdom would also likely refuse extradition on the grounds that the person would be held in such conditions.”
Pavlichenko also pointed out that very few individuals suspected of war crimes were currently in Ukrainian custody.
“It remains a question how many of them could be handed over to other jurisdictions and how many might be transferred to Ukraine,” he continued. “This transfer may have been a signal: by handing over a suspect, Ukraine is suggesting that if such individuals appear in other countries, they should be extradited to Ukraine for criminal prosecution. This was likely intended as a positive signal for the future. Consequently, it is also a message to war criminals that they will not be safe in the various countries that cooperate with Ukraine on extradition.”
Busol agreed that the Lithuania case had great symbolic power.
“It’s a signal that more countries should join these investigations,” she said. “It is crucial for us to restrict travel for Russians, so they understand they are not welcome and can be held accountable and arrested.”
Yavorskyi also emphasised that such prosecutions formed part of a longer-term strategy.
“These crimes have no statute of limitations,” he said. “In five or ten years, some of these individuals will certainly travel to the EU or other countries. That is why it’s crucial to continue the investigations and then establish a system to track down the perpetrators worldwide.”
