Can Ukraine Prosecute Crimes Against Cultural Heritage?

Oksana Rekun

Ukrainian journalist

Friday, 24 October, 2025

The link has been copied

Before Russia’s full-scale invasion, the Chernihiv Youth Library held exhibitions, organised cultural events and loaned out around 200,000 books to readers annually. 

“Every year, the library served more than 10,000 readers,” said acting director Maryna Knyr, noting that despite its name, users included young people and pensioners alike. 

But when, on March 11, 2022, the Russian army dropped several 500-kilogramme aerial bombs on the city’s neighbouring stadium, the Chernihiv Youth Library was heavily damaged, with 7,000 books and office equipment also destroyed.

In total, 118 cultural institutions in the Chernihiv region have been destroyed or damaged since February 24, 2022, including cathedrals and churches as archaeological and historical monuments.

Local officials and activists are campaigning for this destruction to be recognised as evidence of Russian war crimes against the cultural heritage of the Chernihiv region and are preparing documents for submission to the International Criminal Court (ICC). 

However, a lack of provision under Ukrainian law means that they are struggling to make their case in national courts. 

Andrii Yakovlev, an expert in international humanitarian and criminal law at the NGO Media Initiative for Human Rights, explained that current national legislation did not specify categories of war crimes.

Article 438 of the criminal code of Ukraine, the section that dealt with war crimes, was very broad and encompassed various offences under the Geneva and Hague conventions, from killing civilians to destroying civilian infrastructure. 

“It lacks a specific catalogue, so effectively any violation of the laws and customs of war is criminalised under it, he continued, noting that this meant there was no provision for specific war crimes – such as environmental or cultural offences committed during wartime – and their corresponding punishments.

This meant that cultural and environmental crimes were usually not separated into distinct legal categories but investigated under this general provision.

Nonetheless, he noted that cultural property was afforded special protection and that parties to the conflict were obligated to safeguard it.

Citing the 1954 Hague Convention, he continued, “An attack on cultural property is permissible only in the exceptional case that the heritage site has been repurposed for military use – for example, as a weapons depot or a military position. However, this is only allowed if there is no feasible alternative to neutralise the threat and/or weaken a military advantage. 

“In other words, a cultural site cannot be attacked simply because it has been converted into a military objective. It does not lose its protection and therefore such an attack would constitute a war crime.

“However, for a military attack on a civilian site to be considered lawful, simply confirming a military objective and the advantage it offers is not enough. The attack and its consequences must be proportional to the military threat,” Yakovlev said.

The case of the Chernihiv Youth library was particularly complicated. 

At least eight territorial defence fighters were killed at the Gagarin Stadium and the nearby Summer Theatre during the Russian airstrike in March. 

“The arena is not a designated cultural heritage site and an attack on it could be considered a military objective in the war,” Yakovlev said. 

“However, when we talk about a library, several questions arise. Is this library widely recognised as a cultural heritage site? Is there sufficient public information confirming its status? Clearly, the greater a library’s cultural significance, the higher the presumed level of public awareness regarding its protected status as a cultural asset.”

The lawyer explained that while the stadium was the likely target, the Russian pilots would have known where they were dropping their bombs and what was located nearby and consequently, should have taken into account the impact of the attack on the protected cultural heritage site. 

While the prosecutor general’s office has registered the damage or destruction of at least 47 cultural heritage sites of national and local importance in the Chernihv region as part of its investigation into violations of the laws and customs of war, it emphasised that this does not automatically translate into evidence of crimes against Ukrainian heritage.

“It should be noted that no evidence has been found of deliberate strikes on these sites aimed at destroying Ukrainian culture, heritage or the identity of the Ukrainian people. All the damaged sites are considered collateral damage resulting from attacks on civilian targets and people,” the prosecutor’s office stated.

Yakovlev said that prosecuting specific cases of crimes against cultural heritage would be easier once Ukraine ratified the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the ICC.

“I hope that the implementation of the Rome Statute will be fully completed in the near future and that we will have a comprehensive catalogue of war crimes. This is necessary not only to bring greater clarity to our criminal law but also because Ukraine has over 190,000 registered war crimes [as of September 2025]. This number includes incidents that may not actually be considered war crimes. 

“The lack of a war crimes catalogue complicates statistics and, consequently, the prioritisation of investigations. The diligent way these cases are classified in Chernihiv, I believe, is a good example. They are paying closer attention not only to what is entered into the register but also to the prospects of seeing a case through to its logical conclusion,” he concluded.

While it remains unclear if the case regarding the library’s destruction will be classified as a crime against cultural heritage, restoration work is underway. A 3D model of the building has also been made for digital documentation by the teams Skeiron and Scan UA.

“In our work, we use two innovative techniques: laser 3D scanning and photogrammetry,” the Skeiron team explained in a statement. “The laser creates millions of points to form a precise ‘point cloud’ of an object, while photogrammetry provides photorealistic textures. Together, they allow us to reproduce a monument’s exact shape, size and materials.”

These digital copies are crucial for planning restoration and allow for structural analysis without risking damage to the original. They ensure that cultural heritage is preserved, even in the event of destruction.

Approximately 28 million hryvnias (670,000 US dollars) are still needed for the library to become fully operational, with an additional nine million hryvnias (215,000 dollars) required to install a modular shelter nearby. It is not yet known when these funds might be allocated or when the work will begin.

However, the Youth Library building has been stabilised to prevent its collapse and some services have resumed, although lending patterns have changed.

Knyr said that before February 2022, Soviet-era fiction in Russian – popular with local pensioners - made up 60 per cent of the entire collection.

“After Russia’s full-scale invasion, the demand for Russian-language books disappeared among users of all ages,” she said. “Instead, there has been a growing demand for Ukrainian books and contemporary authors.”