The Moscow Mechanism: Evidence and Advocacy

Victoria Matola

Watchers Editor-in-chief

Thursday, 16 October, 2025

The link has been copied

Ukrainian human rights defenders hope that an Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) mechanism will provide crucial support for efforts to highlight and prosecute Russian war crimes.

The Moscow Mechanism allows the deployment of short-term, fact-finding missions to address specific regional human rights concerns. It has been triggered five times in relation to alleged Russian crimes since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, most recently concerning the treatment of Ukrainian POWs.

In September the Mechanism concluded that the Russian Federation bore state responsibility for widespread abuse in its treatment of Ukrainian detainees, stating that “these violations may constitute war crimes and, in some cases, arguably, crimes against humanity”.

The September findings established the mass and systematic torture of detainees, with cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment including sexual violence as well as inadequate nutrition and care, which led to deaths in captivity. It also documented arbitrary executions of Ukrainian POWs, and their exploitation for propaganda, forced cooperation and in show trials.

Citing testimony from released POWs, the mission’s report states that 89.4 per cent of them experienced some form of mistreatment. Of those, 63.8 per cent reported physical violence, 55.2 per cent psychological abuse and 42.9 per cent  sexual violence.

Previous Moscow Mechanism reports - so named because the decision to create the process was made at a 1991 OSCE meeting in the Russian capital - have focused on the deportation of Ukrainian children to Russia and the detention of civilians in occupied territories.

Findings are shared with relevant accountability mechanisms and may be presented to national, regional, or international courts.

“In the Moscow Mechanism report, the experts don’t just analyse the issues; they also provide specific recommendations,” said Lyubov Smachylo, head of the analytical department at the Media Initiative for Human Rights, an Ukrainian NGO.

“These can be addressed to the Russian Federation, Ukraine or third countries to resolve a particular violation. Of course, these are not legal proceedings and there is no obligation to implement such recommendations. But countries committed to protecting human rights will take them on board.”

Rapid-response Report

The Moscow Mechanism must be initiated by an OSCE participating state and then supported by a majority of other member states. Once approved, three international experts are selected from a specially created roster to investigate a specific issue. They conduct their investigation over two to three months, gathering evidence of potential crimes. The mission’s work usually involves consulting with national human rights organisations and government agencies working on the issues as well as interviewing victims.

Smachylo said that the Media Initiative for Human Rights had specifically advocated for invoking the Moscow Mechanism to address the detention and captivity of civilians in the occupied territories.

“We found it very difficult to advance this issue and keep it on the agenda in international forums and specifically to demonstrate that the detention of civilians is a crime against humanity, as we see they are being deliberately persecuted and held captive,” she told IWPR. “The Moscow Mechanism expert report is therefore crucial for positioning this problem on the international stage. Moreover, such reports preserve evidence of international crimes committed by the Russian Federation. And that is very important.”

Smachylo added that the OSCE findings, subsequently published in April 2024, clearly and thoroughly explained what legally constituted a crime against humanity in this context and that the Russian Federation’s policy on this violation was both deliberate and systemic.

Thus, following its publication, she continued, human rights organisations began to focus more on this issue.

Mikhail Savva, an expert at the Centre for Civil Liberties NGO who has worked with Moscow Mechanism experts on two reports, noted that it was currently the only functioning mechanism within the OSCE. Russia was blocking all the others.

Savva said that he had seen tangible progress on specific problems analysed in the Moscow Mechanism reports; for instance, the issue of returning Ukrainian children who were taken to the Russian Federation.

“In 2022 and early 2023, the return of Ukrainian children from the Russian Federation was extremely problematic,” Savva noted. “Parents who traveled to the facilities where their children were held would present documents, but in response, the facility directors would call in Federal Security Service (FSB) agents. The parents were then interrogated for hours and threatened. While the children were successfully retrieved in most cases, it was a very difficult process.

“Later, after the report under the Moscow Mechanism, children were returned without major problems. The main challenge then became locating them and having a close relative travel there with documents proving their relationship.”

Savva added that OSCE reports were also used by lawyers in EU courts for specific cases involving individuals seeking protection. They can cite such reports as evidence to confirm that their lives were under threat. Ukrainians who have left the occupied territories, for instance, have referenced the Moscow Mechanism expert report to demonstrate the persecution of civilians and the systematic war crimes committed against them by the Russians.

“Yes, Ukrainian human rights defenders may know significantly more about international crimes in Ukraine than OSCE experts,” Savva said. “But for us, these special reports are crucial for international advocacy, for engaging with international organisations and the governments of various countries when we demand sanctions against Russian war criminals... And, of course, the information in the Moscow Mechanism reports is taken seriously. It’s one thing when Ukrainian human rights defenders say that Russia is violating international humanitarian law; it’s another when that assessment comes from impartial experts representing other countries.”